Author Topic: You might want to skip the whole Blu-Ray generation (Read 24401 times)

zridling · « **on:** September 14, 2008, 01:22 AM »

Blu-Ray, I hardly knew ya; thank goodness I never bought one!

Samsung: Blu-ray has 5 Years Left, OLED HD on the Way:

Samsung has said that it sees the Blu-ray format only lasting a further 5 years before it is replaced by another format or technology. "I think it [Blu-ray] has 5 years left, I certainly wouldn't give it 10", Andy Griffiths, director of consumer electronics at Samsung UK told Pocket-lint in an interview.
________________________
My big dilemma: On what storage medium should I store my [long-term] data, since it's perpetually being replaced?

Ehtyar · « **Reply #1 on:** September 14, 2008, 01:47 AM »

Very interesting, thank you zridling.

Ehtyar.

Deozaan · « **Reply #2 on:** September 14, 2008, 03:09 AM »

I disagree. Even though Blu-Ray is the "current-gen" optical media format, I think DVD is still the most widely used media, perhaps even CD as well.

So it may only be 5-10 years before the OLED HD or whatever other format that replaces Blu-Ray is available, but I think Blu-Ray itself will probably at that point be where DVD is now.

jgpaiva · « **Reply #3 on:** September 14, 2008, 05:29 AM »

My big dilemma: On what storage medium should I store my [long-term] data, since it's perpetually being replaced?
-zridling (September 14, 2008, 01:22 AM)

I'd say in none

Either store it in a serious format (like catastrophe-resistent tapes!

) or in an hdd, after all, they're almost at the same price per GB (if not even lower!) and they'll never go out of style.
Actually, on the other hand, with the update of the data interfaces (ide/sata/sata II/e-sata/jump-through-hoops-sata/etc), you probably can't keep that one either. Just go for the tapes

housetier · « **Reply #4 on:** September 14, 2008, 05:50 AM »

My big dilemma: On what storage medium should I store my [long-term] data, since it's perpetually being replaced?
-zridling (September 14, 2008, 01:22 AM)

Well paper has been around for a couple centuries, it might get a few more :-)

jgpaiva · « **Reply #5 on:** September 14, 2008, 05:59 AM »

@housetier: Why not carve it on stone, then? That method has worked for quite a few millenia

4wd · « **Reply #6 on:** September 14, 2008, 06:17 AM »

Dang it!! I'm still waiting for holographic crystals!!

Dormouse · « **Reply #7 on:** September 14, 2008, 06:21 AM »

The only way to keep long-term data is to perpetually renew it. And to test that what you have stored is in good condition without corruption.
If you can't afford to do that, I'd agree that the only guaranted long-term answer is paper.

Of the DVD formats, DVD-RAM is the best for long-term storage - but it does not have anything like the capacity of Blu-ray.

If you are using computer storage without perpetual renewal, you need also to make sure that you have drives, computers, OSs etc that allow you to read the formats you have, however obsolete. I still have 5 1/4" drives (& discs) though I don't think I have anything important on them. I also have nested hierarchies of "stuff" from old computers - just saved on to the new HDDs (not stuff I knew I'd want, which I moved on deliberately, but just the random stuff left because you never know when it might have something you want); not a problem keeping it because the HDD sizes just keep on getting bigger. My first HDD was either 20 or 80 MB (can't remember which now) and cost me an arm and a leg, and in those days copying data from one computer format to another was a real time-consuming pain.

f0dder · « **Reply #8 on:** September 14, 2008, 08:05 AM »

The only way to keep long-term data is to perpetually renew it. And to test that what you have stored is in good condition without corruption.
-Dormouse (September 14, 2008, 06:21 AM)

Hear ye, hear ye!

Back up to a mirrored harddisk-based device - if you can afford it, more than one mirror disk. Do incremental backups and not simply synchronization (what good is a backup if it stores a file that became corrupted on your workstation, and you can't get back a good copy of the file?).

Ideally, you also need to backup this storage to an off-site location... this could be through a (super)fast internet pipe, or on an external harddisk that you routinely sync and then leave at a friends house/whatever.

If you can't afford to do that, I'd agree that the only guaranted long-term answer is paper.
-Dormouse (September 14, 2008, 06:21 AM)

We had a thread about "paper-based backup" a while ago. I dunno if today's paper and printers would last as long as some of the old papyrus, though.

As for the whole DVD/HD-DVD/BluRay/whatevernextgen, I'm waiting it out. I have a DVD collection that I'm not going to replace anytime soon, and the whole HD "infrastructure" isn't really there yet anyway. Once I get the cash for a 1080p capable TV, I'll reconsider things... and the new format might actually have arrived then

jgpaiva · « **Reply #9 on:** September 14, 2008, 08:46 AM »

Once I get the cash for a 1080p capable TV, I'll reconsider things... and the new format might actually have arrived then
-f0dder (September 14, 2008, 08:05 AM)

Actually, make it "once I get the cash for a HUGE 1080p capable tv, and cable tv support for it, etc etc".
Honestly, from what I read, I'm starting to think this whole thing is just bogus, since adding 1080p to a tv smaller than 40' (or something like that, not sure about the numbers) doesn't really make a difference, and most of the tv channels still are broadcasting in low definition.

f0dder · « **Reply #10 on:** September 14, 2008, 08:55 AM »

Yeah, as I wrote the whole infrastructure isn't there yet - there's only very few HD channels.

Anyway, while you might not be able to spot much of a difference between 720p and 1080p on smaller TVs, it does make a difference if you also want to use the TV as a computer monitor

It'll probably be 3-5 years before I'm going to buy a biggo flat-panel TV - hopefully, the infrastructure is in place then, and we'll know better what's going to happen with the whole media format thingamajig.

Rhutobello · « **Reply #11 on:** September 14, 2008, 04:49 PM »

It'll probably be 3-5 years before I'm going to buy a biggo flat-panel TV - hopefully, the infrastructure is in place then, and we'll know better what's going to happen with the whole media format thingamajig.
-f0dder (September 14, 2008, 08:55 AM)

In 3-5 year you(and I) are able to buy our big flat panel TV and the Blue Ray machine, but I am sure there will be something new that we don't can afford, which is on top when we come to 2013.

It is a part of the consumer society, they always need to put up something new, in order to keep the production on top, and it will always be those who must have the latest version who must pay...........and never receive the full benefit of what they buy......on the other hand...that will we....long live the waiting ....even if we aren't hip

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #12 on:** September 14, 2008, 04:57 PM »

Personally I don't want a huge TV screen - 32" is quite big enough in my living room. There is more to life than TV so why should it completely dominate the wall space?

If I ever do go for a big screen I think I might look at a projection screen that can be put out of site when not required. Hopefully they will come down in price.

electronixtar · « **Reply #13 on:** September 14, 2008, 04:59 PM »

I disagree. Even though Blu-Ray is the "current-gen" optical media format, I think DVD is still the most widely used media, perhaps even CD as well.

So it may only be 5-10 years before the OLED HD or whatever other format that replaces Blu-Ray is available, but I think Blu-Ray itself will probably at that point be where DVD is now.
-Deozaan (September 14, 2008, 03:09 AM)

as a matter of fact USB flash drive is the most popular storage in China.

about 30 RMB per GByte, I think.

Cloq · « **Reply #14 on:** September 14, 2008, 05:17 PM »

Meh.. still waiting for that 200GB per disc... $:-\$

----------------------------
How much data can you fit on a Blu-ray disc?

A single-layer disc can hold 25GB.
A dual-layer disc can hold 50GB.

To ensure that the Blu-ray Disc format is easily extendable (future-proof) it also includes support for multi-layer discs, which should allow the storage capacity to be increased to 100GB-200GB (25GB per layer) in the future simply by adding more layers to the discs.

f0dder · « **Reply #15 on:** September 15, 2008, 05:48 AM »

I still don't see the point of using optical media for backups.

It's slow, it's annoying, and they're fragile. Harddisk based backups and tape storage for longterm is the only way to go, imho.

zridling · « **Reply #16 on:** September 15, 2008, 06:37 AM »

Three problems I see.
(1) The longer you're in the [computing] game, the more expensive this problem becomes.
(2) The whole exercise is a time sink. I'm coming close to online storage of my essential data, but that opens an entirely new set of problems.
(3) HDs are the cheapest storage solution as Dormouse and f0dder pointed out, but yes, you do have to eventually transfer data between the next bus/controller generation, not to mention filesystems. I haven't had a HD failure in over a dozen years now, so I feel lucky in that regard.

Would it ever be possible to develop a universal format?
(4wd: holographic crystals! at the least dilithium wouldn't react with antimatter)

I have several data sets from the mid-80s that are ongoing and I've been transferring them since the 5.25 floppy disk days.

f0dder · « **Reply #17 on:** September 15, 2008, 06:48 AM »

I have several data sets from the mid-80s that are ongoing and I've been transferring them since the 5.25 floppy disk days.
-zridling (September 15, 2008, 06:37 AM)

And there really isn't any way around this, if you want to be able to access your data. It's not really a problem wrt. storage, since we get bigger and faster HDDs all the time - so it's not that big a deal migrating your dataset to a new storage solution (sure, it's going to take time when you need to move terabytes around, but at least that operation can be pretty much automated). File formats (and their associated programs...) are the real headache.

Armando · « **Reply #18 on:** September 15, 2008, 11:56 AM »

File formats (and their associated programs...) are the real headache.
-f0dder (September 15, 2008, 06:48 AM)

That's why one shouldn't use obscure formats, and especially if they're closed.
Could be handy to keep a few old machines (like old laptops) still running old software, just in case...

4wd · « **Reply #19 on:** September 17, 2008, 07:18 PM »

(4wd: holographic crystals! at the least dilithium wouldn't react with antimatter)
-zridling (September 15, 2008, 06:37 AM)

The technology exists for holographic crystals, (just a modified version of holographic disks).

Regarding using dilithium, it won't react with anti-matter as long as it's energised. So if you happen to leave it lying on a bench in an anti-matter universe.....POOF!....there goes your data.

That's why one shouldn't use obscure formats, and especially if they're closed.
Could be handy to keep a few old machines (like old laptops) still running old software, just in case...
-Armando (September 15, 2008, 11:56 AM)

I would think that a few VMWare/VirtualPC/VirtualBox OS images on a HDD would be a more space efficient method rather than cluttering up your place with lot's of archaic hardware, (what am I saying

).

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #20 on:** September 17, 2008, 07:45 PM »

I would think that a few VMWare/VirtualPC/VirtualBox OS images on a HDD would be a more space efficient method rather than cluttering up your place with lot's of archaic hardware, (what am I saying ).
-4wd (September 17, 2008, 07:18 PM)

Assuming that Virtual Disc formats don't change and the software indefinitely supports old operating systems! What is going to happen when new versions of Windows/Linux etc. drop support for PATA and ATAPI devices - will VMWare etc. keep supporting them forever? Doubt it very much!

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #21 on:** September 17, 2008, 07:50 PM »

SSD/flash media seems to be the new way to backup small amounts of data (unless you fork out the cash for one of those humongous flash drives). I use an external USB hard drive for most of my stuff, with a complete set of setup files ready on command for those "60 minute" reformats.

f0dder · « **Reply #22 on:** September 17, 2008, 07:55 PM »

Flash media is too small for many kinds of backup - and the USB connected devices as well as most flash card media are too slow as well. OK for syncing a handful of documents and source code, but not for automated and regular several-gigabyte backups

Nothing really beats a local fileserver with mirrored disks on a gigabit connection - and, for extra security, some 2nd level of backup that preferably goes out-house (whether online or manually secure external disk, tapes, whatever).

I still personally need to set up a proper backup scheme

. I do have the aforementioned fileserver, but I haven't found a backup program that pleases me

Shades · « **Reply #23 on:** September 17, 2008, 08:24 PM »

@f0dder:

It is very likely that you heard of and/or maybe even tried this one, but is Bacula not the right solution for you?

Using it here and although it is a b*tch to setup, but after that it's as reliable as the Linux distro you are using to run it (CentOS 4.x in my case).

4wd · « **Reply #24 on:** September 18, 2008, 03:13 AM »

I would think that a few VMWare/VirtualPC/VirtualBox OS images on a HDD would be a more space efficient method rather than cluttering up your place with lot's of archaic hardware, (what am I saying ).
-4wd (September 17, 2008, 07:18 PM)

Assuming that Virtual Disc formats don't change and the software indefinitely supports old operating systems! What is going to happen when new versions of Windows/Linux etc. drop support for PATA and ATAPI devices - will VMWare etc. keep supporting them forever? Doubt it very much!
-Carol Haynes (September 17, 2008, 07:45 PM)

I just said on a HDD, not that it was PATA/SATA/SCSI/Fibre Channel/etc but personally I would use SCSI if it's that much of an issue, (AFAIK, all recent invocations of SCSI are still backward compatible with the original SCSI spec requiring only an adapter to connect to a current host - the drives are also more robust than normal HDDs).

And logically, if you are going to keep a HDD with Virtual systems you would install a base OS on it along with the Virtual Host software. eg. Ubuntu with VirtualBox plus your virtual systems.
So it doesn't matter if later versions of [insert virtual host here] don't understand earlier virtual drive formats.

For that matter, just partition the HDD, install a boot manager and as many OS's as you want. Then you can just image it from one HDD to the next when keeping up with interfaces becomes too much.