Cd Backups Aren’t Forever

[Trevor]

Bangkok Post article from 3rd January 2007 claims that self-burned CDs sometimes only last a year before they’re no longer readable and the data is lost. Made of polycarbonate, CD-ROMs are subject to a disintegration process that maker them harder to read over time. That’s why it’s important to store video films, images or music on a hard drive.

Well, I’ve not knowingly lost any stored disk files over the past 5 years but this assertion is worrying. As an alternative to hard drives, I wonder if there are any types of plastic media with a longer shelf-life?

[cdnvic]

In alot of cases it's still a matter of getting what you pay for. The cheap yet flimsy cds I only use for transfering large amounts of data to work or similar disposable situations. Anything I archive is done on high quality DVD and stored in a cool dark environment.

If you have an external HD case you can make good use of old 10/20gb hard drives by storing your old media on them and swapping them in whenever you need.

Edited January 20, 2007 by cdnvic

[waldwolf]

......As an alternative to hard drives, I wonder if there are any types of plastic media with a longer shelf-life?

There are both CD and DVD media which the manufacturer claims will last 300 and 100 years respectively. They are available from several sources, such as "Memorex Pro Gold Archival".

These media have a non-corrosive 24-karat gold reflective layer, special high performance dyes and special scratch-resistant technology. Both carry a "lifetime warranty".

Current cost is approximately $6.00 (US) per blank.

waldwolf

(PS-Haven't yet figured out why the CD's have a 300 year life and the DVD's only 100 years. )

[Florin]

I just update my media...when floppy disks were the mobile storage medium of choice, I put stuff on them. Then when blank CDs (and writers) became readily available, I transfered everything to CD. When the DVD revolution started, I put all the stuff on DVD...now, in surely not more than a year HD-DVD blanks will become readily available, so that's the logical next step. Thus, stuff doesn't stay on the same media more than 3-5 years, which I've found is pretty acceptable even for cheap blanks.

[Gary A]

I'll start by saying that I DON'T buy cheap CD's. I had loads of pictures and other things I had saved and when I went to open some of those CD's I found that many would not open. The diagnosis from one of my techie friends was that the CD's were destroyed by a fungus. Holding the CD's against the light revealed some tiny spots where the light actually showed through those tiny holes. That's when I went and bought a USB hard drive. I'll NEVER store anything of importance on CD's again. Take it for what it's worth but that was my experience. 100 to 300 years? BULL!

[cdnvic]

A properly stored disk should never be getting fungus on it. If it's a quality disk the surface can be easily burnished and made readable at quite a few places.

[autonomous_unit]

(PS-Haven't yet figured out why the CD's have a 300 year life and the DVD's only 100 years. )

These sorts of average life estimates are based on a presumed process by which the medium degrades and starts to develop flaws, eventually hitting a point where the flaws are large enough and/or frequent enough to disrupt the reading process. The higher data density means that the physical features (which are read by the optical reader) are much smaller. Any physical process of degradation will impact many more storage locations at once, thereby placing more strain the error recovery codes until finally it is impossible to recover the original information.

By the way, a truly impressive piece of software out there is called "dvdisaster" which applies more aggressive error correcting codes to optical media. You can use it to master new disks that are much more tolerant to scratches and rot, by dedicating a larger fraction of the total storage area to redundant error codes. They have some very interesting explanations and experimental demonstrations, including recovery of all data off a disk that you'd be surprised even fits in the drive, they've physically damaged it so much...

[sabajja]

It all comes down to storage.

Even cheap Princo CD's will last for years if you store them properly.

I have several of e'm made years ago, stored in a good quality

"CD book", with soft paper background.

They're still going strong.

Offcourse I also handle them like a mountain blaster, insering blasting caps

to avoid scratches !

Wellknown fact about Princo, Don't ever put e'm in the sun !

Especially not under the cars wind screen.

It'll ruin them in a day.

Edited January 21, 2007 by sabajja

[cdnvic]

But on the upside, it takes a shotgun blast to break a Princo.

I've got 5yr old Princos still going strong.

[sabajja]

Don't know if you saw it on Mythbusters, put a CD in your microwave

and nuke it for a few seconds.

FBI guaranteed data annihilation !!

Edited January 21, 2007 by sabajja

[Gary A]

I don't know what stored properly means. The disks were stored in the original plastic boxes they came in. I never bought bulk disks that come in a stack in a round container. Since the disks had no visible signs of any fungus or other damage, I was surprised to hear him tell me that. I did Google it and found out that it does happen. I'll stick with my USB hard drive.

[fxm88]

Bangkok Post article from 3rd January 2007...

That's what I love about the Bangkok Post: cutting edge news. This story is more than a year old:

"Storage expert warns of short life span for burned CDs", January 10, 2006 (Computerworld)

Then again, it's not news until it's published in the Bangkok Post.

[sabajja]

I don't know what stored properly means. The disks were stored in the original plastic boxes they came in. I never bought bulk disks that come in a stack in a round container. Since the disks had no visible signs of any fungus or other damage, I was surprised to hear him tell me that. I did Google it and found out that it does happen. I'll stick with my USB hard drive.

Plastic boxes are a big no no to store CD's longtime in.

I brought my whole CD collection to here from abroad,(all in Plastic boxes),

the fungus got most of e'm.

Apparently moisture builds up inside these containers, unless very well ventilated, or air conditioned.

The best storage is the CD book with paper backgrounds I have found out, for long storage.

Edited January 21, 2007 by sabajja

[bino]

The best storage is the CD book with paper backgrounds I have found out, for long storage.

I agree 100%.

In addition, keeping the CDs in books cuts down on the overall volume and weight when you need to move / transport your library!

I've lost a lot of data to fungus in cheap or no-name CDs. It seems that the edge of the CD isn't sealed very well on a cheap CD after the "sandwich" construction, allowing moisture and fungus to creep in. I figure that it comes from handling the CD by the edges- oil and dirt on your fingers contributing to break down the seal.

I've had good luck with Memorex CDs... never had one go bad yet.

[PeaceBlondie]

Axl Rose said it best: "Nothing lasts forever, in the cold November rain, or the fungal Thai wet season."

One hundred years? In that time, we've gone from grammaphones to laquer records to vinyl records to cassette and 8-track tapes and reel to reel acetate tapes; to floppies and diskettes and CD's and VCD's and DVD's. Shannnadaggga's going to be the very next thing, and then we'll be recording data on poxshadoodoojustdoit. Popular media storage devices don't last ten years before being replaced by the latest fad. Have you tried to buy a floppy disk lately? Got any good Motown tapes on 8-track?

[Crossy]

Interesting article on media obsolescence http://www.tasi.ac.uk/advice/delivering/pdf/digpres.pdf

"It is interesting to note that due to technological obsolescence and media fragility many consider it is possible that future generations will have less information about the Gulf War (recorded on digital media) than the first World War (recorded on analogue media). "

[cdnvic]

"It is interesting to note that due to technological obsolescence and media fragility many consider it is possible that future generations will have less information about the Gulf War (recorded on digital media) than the first World War (recorded on analogue media). "

Somewhere I have mp3s of WW1 recordings.... on cds of course.

[Khleerm]

I think too many people posting are still missing the mark here. Variations of ambient temperature, humidity and delamination are the greatest problems to confront. CD's are frail foils bonded to plastic.

And to make matters worse, the mfrs. are continually updating the manufacturing process via introduction or substitution of new chemicals and materials.

No one mentioned using a Sharpie pen to scribe on their CDs. But they're a very caustic threat to CDs, and induce micro delamination zones on the surface of the discs.

Care of Archival CDs

and

Care of Archival Compact Discs

are tow authoritative sources of knowledge on this topic.

[TAWP]

Bangkok Post article from 3rd January 2007...

That's what I love about the Bangkok Post: cutting edge news. This story is more than a year old:

"Storage expert warns of short life span for burned CDs", January 10, 2006 (Computerworld)

Then again, it's not news until it's published in the Bangkok Post.

Or better yet, this is a widely known thing by most computer-techs since 15 years or so...=)

[Guest Reimar]

I found it is very interesting to see that everybody talks about CD, DVD ar Harddisk for Backup. Why no one talks about tha quiet old but still very reliable Tape Backup? Or, if not about the Tape Backup what's about the MO (magneto optical) Drive and Backup?

Tape backups available with an maximum storage capacity of ~80 GB up and MO Drive from 128 MB til 2.1 GB!

I using both of this kind of backups: Tapes with DDS 3 = max. 24 GB (compressed) and MO 640 MB.

The advantage of the MO Drive is that you can use them like a harddrive: read, write, delete, copy, move whatever you want at every time!

CD and/or DVD I'll never use for permanent backup: Not Safe Enough!

[cdnvic]

I found it is very interesting to see that everybody talks about CD, DVD ar Harddisk for Backup. Why no one talks about tha quiet old but still very reliable Tape Backup? Or, if not about the Tape Backup what's about the MO (magneto optical) Drive and Backup?

Tape backups available with an maximum storage capacity of ~80 GB up and MO Drive from 128 MB til 2.1 GB!

I using both of this kind of backups: Tapes with DDS 3 = max. 24 GB (compressed) and MO 640 MB.

The advantage of the MO Drive is that you can use them like a harddrive: read, write, delete, copy, move whatever you want at every time!

CD and/or DVD I'll never use for permanent backup: Not Safe Enough!

Because they are even more vulnerable in a hot, humid climate.

[sabajja]

I'm starting to get worried now.

I guess in the stoneage, those guys were really aware of reliability.

Chisel and hammer onto granite = shelflife +/- 10.000 years

[bino]

Why no one talks about tha quiet old but still very reliable Tape Backup?

Too bloody slow. I used to get impatient 10 years ago waiting to back up a 40 MB hard drive to a tape. Couldn't imagine waiting for 80 gigs.

I even find CD's to be too slow and a pain in the a$$ when I want to back up 20 gigs of data, because it means burning approximately 25 CDs to do it all, and it requires time and constant attention to swap out the disks.

Hard disk is the way to go for me. It is one step to start the process, and can run unattended until it is finished.

I keep my desktop backed up on my laptop, my laptop backed up on my desktop, and both machines backed up on an external hard disk. This way, if and when a hard drive fails, I can recover from one of the others.

Edited January 22, 2007 by bino

[waldwolf]

One solution might be the new SSD (Solid State Drive) from SanDisk.

Brief description:

The drive, which is based on the SSDs of Msystems', a company which was recently acquired by Sandisk, is scheduled to become available in 2007 for enterprise users and will offer about half the capacity of today's entry level notebooks with traditional hard drives (60 GB). However, it is performance and power savings that sets the SSD apart from an ordinary hard drive.

The file access rate of the Sandisk SSD is rated at 0.12 milliseconds, compared to 19 milliseconds of a hard drive. At least the random read rate is about 100 times faster than what a hard drive delivers and, collectively, the features provide enough performance to boot Windows Vista Enterprise in about 35 seconds, Sandisk said.

Price: $600 (US)

waldwolf

[Guest Reimar]

Why no one talks about tha quiet old but still very reliable Tape Backup?

Too bloody slow. I used to get impatient 10 years ago waiting to back up a 40 MB hard drive to a tape. Couldn't imagine waiting for 80 gigs.

I even find CD's to be too slow and a pain in the a$$ when I want to back up 20 gigs of data, because it means burning approximately 25 CDs to do it all, and it requires time and constant attention to swap out the disks.

Hard disk is the way to go for me. It is one step to start the process, and can run unattended until it is finished.

I keep my desktop backed up on my laptop, my laptop backed up on my desktop, and both machines backed up on an external hard disk. This way, if and when a hard drive fails, I can recover from one of the others.

Bino, you're right: Tape backup is "bloody" slow!

But we working different and not on Tape only! First backup is : Mirroring HD to HD simultan in Real Time; 2. is day by day to MO 2.1 GB every morning; 3.: Tape 24 GB for dayli incremental backup every 2 hour and 4. is Tape 80 GB once a week on Friday night (Auto-Backup). For permanent Backups we using Tape or MO disk only.

For private may it doesn't matter about the quality or relaibility or safe of storage but for corporate systems?!

You see, in the last year we was installing 8 new SCSI HDD each 146 GB in the system, mirroring 4 to 4 and within 3 month 3 of this brand new HD was down while at the same moment 1 was "Master" and "Slave"and that's happens over the weekend. If we dont have a Tape Backup, dayli incremental, we was loosing all data with was coming in from Saturday and Sunday because we hoosting the Mail and Webserver in house!

All mechanical backups are in an danger state and not sure enough for corporate businesses.

Slow and Sure is much better than Fast and Dead!

[sabajja]

One solution might be the new SSD (Solid State Drive) from SanDisk.

Brief description:

The drive, which is based on the SSDs of Msystems', a company which was recently acquired by Sandisk, is scheduled to become available in 2007 for enterprise users and will offer about half the capacity of today's entry level notebooks with traditional hard drives (60 GB). However, it is performance and power savings that sets the SSD apart from an ordinary hard drive.

The file access rate of the Sandisk SSD is rated at 0.12 milliseconds, compared to 19 milliseconds of a hard drive. At least the random read rate is about 100 times faster than what a hard drive delivers and, collectively, the features provide enough performance to boot Windows Vista Enterprise in about 35 seconds, Sandisk said.

Price: $600 (US)

waldwolf

Is this one of those new "Non volatile" memorys ?

I read somewhere, unlike flash (which is volatile), the Non volatile

memory products will have an almost unlimited lifetime...

[Guest Reimar]

~ US$ 600.- for 32 GByte?

Ok, it's Flash Memory without mechanic! 100 times shorter reading time also!

Ideal for small Notebooks and from the space by todays Hotplug technology much enough!

But as Backup system for professional use?

For private OK if you don't look about the cost.

Anyway, the biggest available SSD (Solid State Disk) today is around 350 GB!

But what is the cost?

According to Samsung, one of the manufacturer od SSD drives, the cost will be not come down to the level of "normal" HDD before 2010!

[sensei]

Cd's don't last a lifetime...

It's prone to damage due to (mis)handling.

Hard drives work best, if possible keep data on two separate hard drives,

at the very least, divide one into two partitions.

What I did to make sure that important data will be available for me to access anytime, anywhere

is I opened a Gmail account and mailed everything as an attachment.

That way, I've got 2.7+ Gb of online storage.

As long as the evil empire is up on it's feet

I have my data neatly tucked between it's pitchfork.

Firefox + Gmail space makes the uploading process a breeze.

[Guest Reimar]

Hard drives work best, if possible keep data on two separate hard drives,

at the very least, divide one into two partitions.

What's happens if your HDD fall down, or get a power shock, or a short circuit, let say: just some mechanical defect which crashes your HDD forever? 2 partitions? GONE!! All Data? GONE!!

What now?

The most reliable storage I use is MO-Drives and that the last 20 years! I having still MO-Disk 128 MB which are 20 years old and full fuctional!! Never was loosing Data on MO Disk. If the Drive gone? Doesn't matter, I've the Data Disk!

By our coporate customers we make a incremental backup every 2 hour to MO Disk! But full backups still to tape which are stored in an shielded Cabinett!

But HDD, we do not trust for permanent Data Storage they are to easy to fail!

[cdnvic]

I think that you need to have more than one backup option as it's clear they all have their faults and vulnerabilities. At least one of them should be offsite as no backups will survive your office burning down.