Thanks for that extra info, I think I might invest in some high capacity SD=
cards to store stuff on.
With regards the WORM cards I know that there are those who do a sterling j=
ob of recording our natural world for posterity and that their recordings a=
re often stored in the 'public domain' and the use of these WORM cards woul=
d seem a great way of protecting their work if not for posterity then at le=
ast a 100 years?
Which ever system you choose there are always pros and cons I know.
Phil
--- In Mitch Hill <> wrote:
>
> A bit more interesting information about archiving image and sound file =
data.
>
> First,
> At 02:34 PM 6/24/2010 -0700, Philip Tyler wrote:
> >I can across this on a photographic website:
> >
> >http://www.dpreview.com/news/1006/10062301sandiskwormsd.asp
> >
> >Here is the last paragraph, which may be of interest to some.
> >
> >Beyond forensic image archiving, SanDisk expects its SD WORM technology =
to
> >be widely adopted in crucial applications such as audio recording and
> >long-term retention of legal documents and medical files. For more
> >information, visit www.sandisk.com/sdworm.
> >
> >These 'WORM' memory cards will apparently allow storage up to 100 years.=
> >Which should be a bit more secure than DVD's or CD's?
>
> I've been following the on going discussions about best and long term way=
> to archive our files with quite a bit of interest. My approach has been =
to
> use SDHC 8GB cards from Sandisc mainly as these are what I use in all my=
> digital cameras and LS-11 recorder. I've not really spent any time to fi=
nd
> out if this is wise or not as at some point in the near future, I'm
> planning a major computer system upgrade and have enough knowledge of
> electronics and data storage that I've not felt the need to make the effo=
rt.
>
> However, reading Phil's message about the SanDisc worm and its projected=
> storage of 100 years and this little bell went ding in the grey matter
> somewhere between my ears.
>
> So, I sent an e-mail to SanDisc customer service last night:
>
> "I use Scandisc Ultra and Extreme SDHC cards for both Nikon cameras and
> Olympus PCM digital recorders.
>
> How long is it safe to depend on these cards for long term storage and
> archiving of data?
>
> What is the best way to store these cards?
>
> Are they sensitive to heat while stored?"
>
> And today I received the following reply:
>
> >Thanks for emailing SanDisk Technical Support. It is our goal to make su=
re
> >you have all the resources you need to get the most from your product.
> >
> >Please note that Sandisk cards has 1,000,000 hours MTBF (Meantime betwee=
n
> >failure). The ideal way to store it is in room temperature.
> >
> >The Ultra cards don't have any temperature rating declared unlike with t=
he
> >Extreme cards that are tested to perform from -25=B0C to 85=B0C (-13=B0F=
to 185=B0F).
>
>
> Now, seeing 1,000,000 hours MTBF, a simple calculation (1,000,000/(365*2=
4)
> shows that you should expect 114.155 years between failures.
>
> I make the assumption that the only real difference between the SanDisc
> WORM and the SanDisc SDHC cards is that you can erase and edit files stor=
ed
> on a standard SDHC card where as you can not the WORM...
>
> Very interesting sez me, me thinks I'll keep archiving my files on SDHC=
> cards and not worry about longevity as long as cards are left alone, the=
> data will outlast me, my children, and probably my grandchildren at this=
> point...
>
> I suspect the WORM concept is more to favor legal issues where data must =
be
> secure and un-alterable, for most of us, we already have the capability w=
e
> need at hand...
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
> Mitch & Shadow...
>
> http://www.4shared.com/dir/UTASxktL/wildlife.html
>
> Shadow's area: http://www.4shared.com/dir/ecfWjyZb/Shadow.html
>
>
>
|