Kingston HyperX Predator USB Flash Drive Does the 1TB Dance

I wanted one until calculated cost per bit.

I just bought a 16 GB thumbdrive for $9 USD.

A 1 TB drive has 62.5 times more storage capacity then the one I just bought and cost 333 times more. I just buy 62 more 16 GB drives and call it a day.

$3000 for a TB of storage on a thumbdrive is crazy. Do to thier small size and portability, these things get lost or broke. I would love to have that much storage in such a small package but I don't think it's worth the gamble.

Was in Best Buy the other day and saw a 128 GiB Flash drive for $169. Eight of these would also give you 1 TiB but would set you back 'only' $1350+tax, and you would have only eight drives to manage versus 62 (I have enough trouble keeping track of my car keys as it is).

Possibly the best reason is the least obvious: you're not keeping all of your eggs in one, very expensive (for now) basket. Something to be said for distributing the risk of that across multiple drives.

You can get 1 tb for $70 external hd, 5" by 6" by 2"....paying over $1k is just crazy talk...

True, you can buy capacious outboard hard-drives for next-to-nothing, and compact ones, too (I've got several myself), but the context here is one of flash drives.

Physically-small, high-capacity drives. One clear advantage flash drives have over other forms of outboard mass-storage is of course their diminutive size. Were this an announcement of 1 TB available in a standard HD form-factor, we'd think they were nuts. Not Old News; Prehistoric. What makes this 1 TB flash drive news is of course its large storage capacity AND its small size. How do we know it is small? Because it is a flash drive and all flash drives are small. They don't need to tell us because this knowledge is implicit in the technology itself. Mention a hard drive, however, and you've said nothing at all about the drive's physical size; it could be tiny or huge; you don't know. Where the context demands such knowledge, it must be explicitly stated in the case of hard drives unless supplied by other elements in the context. As the context is one of buying a less expensive, outboard hard drive with comparable specs, implicit in 'comparable specs' is the ideal of diminutive size, hence my use of "capacious AND compact" with the use of the word 'AND' as implicitly representing the explicitly-unifying *third* spec. :-))

OK.

I had just never seen capacious used as bulky instead of roomy.

Not 'bulky' really; more a reference to 'abundant capacity,' however measured. 'However measured' is the key; 1 TB is certainly 'capacious' in terms of how many bytes you can store on the drive, whereas the drive itself occupies no more physical space than your little pinky (far less, actually, is occupied by the data themselves, given that the structure in which the data are stored is an ultrathin 'film' of trillions of integrated, nanoscale devices which together occupy only the top surface of several very thin, planar silicon crystals. Total volume consumed by this 'film' is maybe a couple of cubic millimeters at most. The drive is capacious on the one hand whilst, on the other, it is anything but. It's how you measure it! :-)

OK.

I misunderstood you twice... at least.

Remember to get a second - and maybe a third - opinion. :-)))

the cost will come down before you know it.

1 TB on a stick sounds good but even at typical USB 2.0 speeds it would take you most of a long day to load or unload the whole drive.

But it said it was USB 3.0, that means a theoretical "maximum" transmission speed of up to 5 Gbit/s (625 MB/s). If your computer does not have USB 3.0, I have seen cards for about $30 USD. Even at half that speed it won't take too long too fill it.

Its 1 K now. Think about how quickly those prices drop. The gigabyte standard will be gone in no time and replaced by TB.