The National Archives are publishing CD/DVD myths! Yikes!
I ran a quick Google search tonight, looking for that baloney article from about five years ago (the one where it was claimed that DVDs only have a life expectancy of 2-5 years), when I came across this shocking discovery: http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt...media-faq.html
The page is full of myths and horsepuckey. For example: Quote:
For starters, they're using webopedia.com -- a low rent site that's basically what existed before wikipedia came out. (Wikipedia, while decent for what it is, is absolutely NOT an accredited or authoritative text of any kind, as any idiot can write whatever he/she wants -- and it may stay that way if nobody catches it, or if enough biased "editors" [unqualified volunteers, usually] decide to agree with it!) A minimum of 4.7GB? :rolleyes: That's ridiculous. I can store 1 kilobyte and let it create a 1GB lead-out, if I felt like it. But I'll go ahead and chalk that up to human typing error -- let's assume it should have stated "maximum". But then it goes on to list a size of "4.7GB" which is wholly inaccurate. A disc only holds 4.38GB, when using actual computer-based 1024 block math. The only people who use "4.7GB" are the marketers writing the disc packages. A professional source would know this, and would most likely mention it. It's safe to assume this "article" has been loosely cobbled together from other sources, and the editor (which appears to be absent, as you'll see in a moment) doesn't really understand optical media whatsoever. Let's continue... Quote:
Then it defers to a bunch of random studies from figure 15 which, while good for what they are, lack context for the layman. (Even better, none of the links work, because the "external link" page code seems to be broken.) Beyond that, having manually located the linked documents, I don't see anything that would have resulted in the "2 to 5 years" lifespan. This sounds like a rip from that poorly-written article in 2005 that suggested optical media was some sort of death trap for data. Since it relied wholly on one IBM magnetic media engineer as the source of information, it comes as no surprise that magnetic tapes/disks were suggested as the only viable media for archival storage. Yeah, that wasn't biased or anything. (Rolls eyes.) Sigh. Let's continue... Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
At least the adhesive labels comment was accurate. Let's continue to (by far) the most boneheaded advice found on this page... Quote:
Let me make this absolutely clear: Color has absolutely zero relation to the quality of media. Beyond that, it seems to buy into the ridiculous marketing of Mitsui (now MAM-A) that gold and phthalocyanine somehow the best materials for optimal media. On both counts, that's ridiculous. For starters, a lot of discs using phthalocyanine burn poorly -- so that's that. Taiyo Yuden, regarded as the industry leader in CD-R, followed closely by Mitsubishi (Verbatim), doesn't use either material. Gold media routinely proves itself to be less reflective than silver-based media. This is one reason companies like Taiyo Yuden and Mitsubishi -- who pride themselves on quality, and not merely costs -- don't use it. Verbatim seems to have created a "gold archival" line of discs simply because some people are dumb enough to insist on buying it. But you know what? The reflective surface of the disc, the underside of the media, uses a silver alloy, while only the top uses the gold to "make it pretty". Now ask yourself why a company would choose to use the harder option (combining to separate foils) as opposed to using a single sheet of metal? Azo is also one of the most readable dyes there is, and it's a stabilized metallic dye used by Mitsubishi Kagaku Media (MKM) a.k.a Mitsubishi Chemicals Corp (MCC). In terms of longevity, it will remain and easy-to-read surface through the years, even as it ages -- possibly more than so-called "longer lasting" dyes. Double-side media only comes in one flavor: Ritek. That's a pretty dismal disc by most experiences, and the double-sided variation hasn't been manufactured for years now, due to higher manufacturing defect rates (or so I've read, and from reliable sources). It's also far easier to mishandle a double-sided disc, since neither side is what you'd consider "safe" for general handling -- i.e., not touching the "data surface" of a media. I would also note that pure silver is almost never used as a reflective surface because it tends to react poorly with other materials in the disc, such as the dye. For that reason, most "silver color" metals are alloys that have been stabilized specifically for optical disc use. Although I've already discounted wikipedia as being a reliable source of information, I want to quote something that is as well-written as it is accurate, regarding the nature of CD-R dyes: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Final analysis... I don't know what moron wrote this page at the National Archives, but it's probably some of the most ill-conceived myth filled crap advice I've ever seen on a site that claims to be a guardian of media archiving. Having read this this page, I'm shocked that they are somehow entrusted with documents like the Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence. Good thing those pieces are not on discs! Their knowledge on paper archiving clearly doesn't translate to the digital realm. I just don't know how exactly to express my disappointment with the National Archives. This is just so sad. :( |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.