archival cd-r - really true?
doc at mdrconsult.com
Thu Mar 9 10:47:35 CST 2006
John Allain wrote:
> Looks like the list has decided that MAM-A's are the best archival
> meduim available.
> If somebody knows better, please speak up. $1.50/ea seems cheap
> when compared to retail gold CR-R's when they were available.
I'm not sure this will be a popular view, but *nothing* is a good
archival medium if it isn't maintained.
I and several other listmembers have done a lot of transcription for
entities - mostly University of Texas in my case - who scrupulously
archived, double-archived, and preserved critical data. Then at some
point they scrapped the hardware needed to access their prescious tapes.
Or lost the backup/restore application used to make the archives. Or,
My real-world job is for a company who specializes in data management
and data protection, and we put it to our clients as an axiom. All
archived data needs to be tested and migrated on a frequent (3-5 years
max) basis. I've never seen anything on CC that implies we should
follow any different principle.
My point is that in no case should you rely on the quality of your
medium to preserve historical data, and which meium and which format you
use should be (within reason) a matter of current convenience and
accessibility. You'll be migrating it before that medium is obsolete or
likely to expire.
Nothing says you can't keep the original sets and the original
equipment and tools, but that information should frequently be copied to
whatever your environment currently handles. I have a lot of DOS and
UNIX OS and applications stored as original media and as "dd", Teledisk
and Winimage backups on 4mm DDS1 tape. I'll be keeping all that, but
I'm also migrating it all to ImageDisk, dd, and mktape sets on DLT-IV
More information about the cctech