> : Professor Ted Williams, [says] The system uses a magneto-optical system
> : not dissimilar to that of CD-ROM, except that the system is fixed,
> : solid state, and has a different operating approach.
Is it just me, or does this sentence make no sense whatsoever? :)
A): CD-ROM's are purely optical, no "magento-" involved.
B): Apart from both involving matter and electricity being used in the storage of data, this seems to have no resemblence to a CD ROM whatsoever.
CD-ROMS are pretty much *defined* as being optical (as opposed to electronic "solid state") and moving (as opposed to "fixed"). When you remove those characteristics you don't have much left of a CD-ROM. When you invoke "different operating approach" you remove what little similarity is left.
They might just have well as said "The system is not dissimilar to a subway train, except that it doesn't travel underground, does not have wheels, and you can store hundreds of gigabytes of data on it."
Assuming it is legit, this is the worst example of distortion through simplification of a concept I think I've ever seen.
All this, coupled with the claims about the significance of the device to the future of the computing industry, should be setting off alarm bells.