|
|
Posted by Tim V. on 04/04/06 18:20
"Osmo R" <okaro@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1143191088.785304.268570@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>
> Goro wrote:
>
>>
>> "Why back up when replacements are available at affordable prices?"
>> -RIAA
>>
>
> Actually in this case that makes much sense. Backing up 900 disks
> costs several hundreds. Backing up is economical only if the failure
> rate is greater than the cost
> ratio between the blank media and the backed material. This applies
> only with
> large number of disks. WIth small numbers backing up can be beneficial
> as
> insurance.
>
Yes, good logic for the most part. It all depends on how mainstream the
discs are and their cost. The overpriced Star Trek ($100+ per season
for Voyager, etc) discs are good candidates for archiving whereas your
bargain bin discs may not be.
You can also look at it like: at $1 a blank disc, it is still somewhat
cost effective to backup your $6 bargain bin movie. The question would
more time related. In 5-10 years, what will the availability be of
some of todays discs? With 900 discs, you wouldn't be backing them
all at once. I doubt they were purchased all at once.
--
Tim.
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
"Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own
reputation. It is better to be alone than in bad company" - George
Washington
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|