[rollei_list] Re: CDs and reality of things
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 09:18:43 -0700
Good sidestep Eric. I can learn from you. ;-)
On 4/17/06, Eric Goldstein <egoldste@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Don Williams wrote:
>
> > I agree with Peter with regard to commercial CDs, just based on their
> > construction. For some reason (probably because I'm a saver, something
> > might just come in handy some time you know) I have many AOL CD's from
> > long ago that still read perfectly. (No, I don't use AOL, I just get
> > CD's from them regularly) It may be that in the early days the cover
> > plastic might have had a different coefficient of expansion, or a
> > different chemical makeup, than the base section which holds the stamped
> > image, but if that problem ever existed, it's surely not with us these
> days.
> >
> > I have never had a problem with a self-burned CD-R EXCEPT in a couple of
> > cases. I got some cheap ones from Fry's and they didn't even complete
> > burning. I also got some cheap CD-R blanks which indeed failed right
> > away, just after a day or so. Now I buy only brand names and don't have
> > any problem.
>
> My point here is to get reliable information out to people who may risk
> loosing images because of what they read here. As an engineer Don, I
> would think you understand why I am not talking about anecdotal
> information or manufacturer's estimates; these are both unreliable and
> frankly useless. The problem I reference relative to commercially burned
> CDs failing within months or just a few years is well documented...
> search the net and see for yourself. Tens or hundreds of thousands of
> instances. Anecdotally, I have experienced it myself and know many
> others who have as well. The Library of Congress is spending millions of
> dollars researching a reliable means of storing digital archives because
> nothing now exists that meets any reasonable standard of archivability
> by traditional library standards. Again, this is well-documented on the
> net.
>
> In the past, I've provided ample links detailing this. Personally, I
> think it's essential that folks not take anyone's word for this but
> research it for themselves so that they will understand the magnitude of
> the risk. Or, ask your IT guy at work; if he is half worth his salt he
> will fill your ear full for half an hour... this is a big problem.
>
>
> Eric Goldstein
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
Other related posts:
