Charles is absolutely correct in his solution to storage . the early Egyptians had a good solution and it can be synthetically copied . CD's need to be periodically recopied because of deformity and use over time .it is too new and time untested. Douglas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles R. Weese" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:37 AM Subject: [OHJACKSO-L] CD lifetimes, etc. > This really isn't on-topic, but people seem to want to talk about computer > subjects on all the mailing lists. > > I don't know how long CD-R's or CD-RW's will last and no one really knows > although there have been several accelerated aging tests done. Do some > searching on the Internet. Most quotations that I have seen give anywhere > from 50 years to well over 100 years for a CD-R. CD-RW's are considerably > less reliable and really shouldn't be used for long term storage. They are > fine for routine backups that probably won't be kept for more than a few > years at most. > > The main point that most people never address is the fact that it really > does not matter if they last 100 years. Do you really think the normal > personal computer of 100 years in the future will be able to read a CD? By > that time there will probably have been several generations of storage > media in use. The future will probably belong to some form of crystalline > or solid state storage. Not many people today have the ability to read > media from just 15 or 20 years ago, like 8 inch or 5 1/4 inch diskettes or > cassette tape storage. > > The point is that if you want to keep data alive and usable in the future, > it will have to periodically be copied to new types of media. If that is > not done because of time or money considerations, then the data will be > unavailable even though the old media is still in good condition. > > The best media for preservation has always been acid-free paper. It can > be read by anyone for hundreds of years in the future, but its storage > costs are very high and accessibility is inconvenient. Microfilm has a > good lifetime, but it can deteriorate with age and shows wear and scratches > with usage. Master copies have to be kept under controlled conditions to > periodically replace damaged films and to create copies for new > distribution. This adds expense and inconvenient availability. Of course, > neither paper or microfilm can be electronically searched. > > ======================================== > Charles R. Weese, 4012 Pardee Rd., Stow, Ohio 44224 > > See http://web.raex.com/~cweese/weese/ > and http://web.raex.com/~cweese/vance/ for my family info. > I maintain the following USGenWeb county sites: > Gallia County Ohio at http://www.rootsweb.com/~ohgallia/gallia.htm > Jackson County Ohio at http://www.rootsweb.com/~ohjackso/jackson.htm > Vinton County Ohio at http://www.rootsweb.com/~ohvinton/vinton.htm > >