|WikiProject Computing / Hardware|
|It is requested that a diagram or diagrams be included in this article to improve its quality. Specific illustrations, plots or diagrams can be requested at the Graphic Lab.
For more information, refer to discussion on this page and/or the listing at Wikipedia:Requested images.
Racetrack Memory or IBM Racetrack Memory?
Someone has gone in and very carefully ensured that "Racetrack Memory" is never mentioned without "IBM" in front. Obviously trying to protect the trademark, but it reads like corporate self-promotion. Either rename the article to "IBM Racetrack Memory" (thus leaving the generic term "Racetrack Memory" available for ANY OTHER USE) or or change the tone to make it more appropriate for wikipedia, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
This article alludes to (but never explicitly names) 'a number of new technologies vying to become a "universal memory"' . What are those technologies? Should we list those technologies at computer data storage, or is there a better place for that list? --184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:13, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
The concern above: This article alludes to (but never explicitly names) 'a number of new technologies vying to become a "universal memory"' . What are those technologies?
Seems to be addressed by: "Racetrack memory is one of a number of new technologies aiming to replace flash memory, and potentially offer a "universal" memory device applicable to a wide variety of roles. Other leading contenders include magnetoresistive random-access memory (MRAM), phase-change memory (PCRAM) and ferroelectric RAM (FeRAM). Most of these technologies offer densities similar to flash memory, in most cases worse, and their primary advantage is the lack of write-endurance limits like those in flash memory. Field-MRAM offers excellent performance as high as 3 ns access time, but requires a large 25-40 F² cell size. It might see use as an SRAM replacement, but not as a mass storage device." Caspianhiro (talk) 15:02, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Inaccurate reference to twistor memory
There is a mention of twistor memory. This is not correct unless there is some other connection beside the go faster name.
The twistor memory was basically a different packaging system to core memory, no magnetic domains are moved as in bubble memory and racetrack memory.
It should be removed from the history section unless there is some other valid connection that I am not aware of.