Definitely not lazy drug addicts

Click here to go to most recent posts.

My, what big drives you have, grandma

Recently, I found myself in need of a high-capacity USB drive. After assessing what was on the market, I settled on a 16 GB. HP model. It was the minimum I needed and although I paid a little bit more than similar capacity models, it had the advantage of actually being in stock. In the running was only one other model, the Sandisk offering which I had read often gets "locked" in read-only mode for which there is no "fix" to unlock it. But what really sold me on the HP device was its size.

This evening, while still marvelling at its minuscule dimensions, I decided to take a photo of it and offer up a comparison of it and older storage devices. I've been involved in the tech industry since the early 70's and I did a little research this evening to demonstrate how far we've come since then.

Pictured below is a string of six state-of-the-art IBM 3350 hard disk drives first released in 1975 made for large mainframes. They were far faster and much higher capacity than the previous generation of drives. Each drive had a capacity of about 318 MB. The entire string in the image had a capacity of just under 2 GB. As you can see, each single drive enclosure was about the size of an apartment-sized washer or dryer.

Here is a photo of my new thumb drive:

The dimensions are approximately 1 1/8 in. x 1/2 in. x 1/4 in. And half the device is nothing more than the connector. The actual storage area is about a half inch cube! As I said, the capacity is 16 GB. Compared to the old technology, this new device has a data capacity of more than 50 times a single 3350, and more than 8 times the capacity of the entire 6-device string.

Finally, I paid about $15 for my USB drive. Cost of a single IBM 3350 drive in 1975 was over $30,000. No, I did not misplace the decimal.

Note: 3350's came in pairs. The price above reflects half the cost of a 3350 pair.


Click here to go to most recent posts.

How much?

How much would the following cost?

2 emergency room visits
30 blood pressure tests
20 blood extractions
60 blood tests
20 electro-cardio grams
2 angioplasty procedures--one stent implant
1 nasal packing procedure, subsequent removal
24/7 nursing care for 1 week
7 days and nights in hospital
1 nasal swab analysis
1 rectal swab analysis
10 consultations with various doctors, including cardiologists
30 pills of various sorts (one of which is $10 a pop)
transportation back and forth between two hospitals
3 visits with a psychiatrist
follow-up visit with family doctor
follow-up visit with cardiologist

I probably missed something, but the above is enough to make my point.

Answer:
It depends on where you live.

For the 75 million Americans who have little or no health insurance, the above costs associated with an "average" heart attack might run over $100,000. I have to estimate the cost because as a card-holding communist of Canada, the hospital did not present me with an invoice. My comrades paid a few cents apiece to cover the entire cost just as I have been doing through my taxes for anyone else who has been unfortunate enough to have experienced a heart attack. The thing is, I never missed whatever part of my taxes went to paying for other people's medical costs. I wouldn't want anyone to be saddled with costs like this. It's enough to give you a heart attack.

To my American friends: I hope you all have insurance and I wish you all good health.

By the way, my son (living in Dallas) told me this evening that Obama has levied a huge tax on tobacco. It was enough for my son to vow to quit smoking as soon as his current supply runs out. Yes, we can!