28 Jul
2004
28 Jul
'04
4:40 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe R." <rigdonj(a)cfl.rr.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: Article on data rot on CD's
At 09:35 AM 7/28/04 -0400, you wrote:
I would imagine that the CD itself is not the same as what was made 10 years
ago. Anything that used to cost $8.00 a disc and can now be purchased for
$0.20 a disc is most likely made by a different process and uses a different
phase change dye.
On Tuesday, July 27, 2004, at 11:57 AM, McFadden,
Mike wrote:
The problem is that AFIK no one has found ANY CD disks that are
reliable. Several people that have been interviewed in national
publications explictly pointed out that they bought top quality disks but
they were still unreliable. In fact, it didn't appear that there was much
difference between the cheap ones and the expensive ones.
Joe
and I
I saw this today on USA today website. I've
been scanning 50 year old
slides to CD's and I still have my older PDP-11 data backed up as paper
listings and now on CD's.
This is the paradox of digital archival: while the data can be copied
indefinitely without loss of quality, the life expectancy of the
storage medium is nowhere near traditional media. Cheap recordable
compact discs are notorious for their short life expectancy, would urge caution in anyone relying on them to
save important data.
Kirill