[BC] Re: Digital Archiving

[RichardBJohnson at comcast.net]

This is supposed to be a definitive study.

http://www.uni-muenster.de/Forum-Bestandserhaltung/downloads/iraci.pdf#search=%22study%20cd%20dvd%20reading%20%20reliability%20percent%22

It isn't because it uses words like "laser rot," which a
technical paper should not ever use. Also, their
so-called aging actually attacked the the aluminum
reflecting layer, something a real person would not
let happen. Quite obviously, they set out to destroy
the discs (which they certainly did).

NIST did a study, but they pulled it from their server. I don't know why.

http://www.itl.nist.gov/div895/gipwog/StabilityStudy.pdf

One of the problems with "online research" for defects
is that everything reported is defective! DVDs are supposed to
last for 50 years or more, simply because the phase-change
of the write-once disks isn't reversible at ordinary room
temperatures. Therefore, if nobody tries to screw them up,
they should last "forever." The problem is that nothing
is "forever," and the accelerated life-tests deliberately
try to screw them up! Certainly, they are more reliable
than ANY previous recording media including paper.

--
Cheers,
Richard B. Johnson
Read about my book
http://www.LymanSchool.org


 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: rj carpenter <rcarpen1 at verizon.net>
> The fellow I know who has done accelerated aging tests on CDs and DVDs 
> points out that most of us have no way to tell how hard the error 
> correction is working.
[Snipped]