Thread: BD for backups?
May 22nd, 2012, 10:19 PM #1
BD for backups?
BD is 5.3x higher capacity than DVD. Thus, BD's price has to be 5.3x higher than DVDs to equal the value.
So 0.20c x 5.3 = $1.06. I have not seen BDs selling for that price; so DVDs are still better value. Including cost of the drive, $120, as all PCs come with DVD burners for free.
ASUS SBW-06D2X-U/BLK/G/AS USB 2.0 External Slim 6X Blu-ray Combo Burner Drive in Computer Blu-ray Drives | JR.com
I could buy 2TB HDD for the same price. That's equal to 80 BDs for $80 more.
Plus, I wouldnt risk placing 25gb of stuff on plastic. I as well dont use higher than 4gb cards, and still use CD-Rs as 2nd backup to DVDs. I bought 2 500gb hdds instead of 1TB for fear of failure. Cost comes out to $120 either way. One is at home, other in the safe box at the bank.
May 22nd, 2012, 11:02 PM #2
I'm with you on using hard drives over BDs for backup just because of the convenience part. Also, don't forget netbooks and many ultra thin laptops don't come with any kind of disc drive.
As for reliability, BDs are suppose to stand up a lot better than DVDs and CDs. BDs are built with a lot better material.
I remember when everyone was claiming that a CD will last 99 years, yet I have some CDs that were burned once and put into storage and never used again that I went to find some old files on and the CD could not be read. The CDs had no scratches of any kind and were stored in a dark room temperature closet inside of a jewel case. Those same people claiming CDs lasting for 99 years forgot to mention that only the top quality CDs last. (I did a lot of research on CD Freaks to find out how to determine if the CDs you bought are the good quality Japanese made discs or bad quality Rest Of Asia made discs, as you could not go by the brand to determine the quality)
However, that is not to say HDs fail. I have had plenty of failed hard drives over the years (Luckily most of them were covered under warranty) and it is why I run my backup drives in a RAID 5 configuration.
Last edited by Bizkitkid2001; May 22nd, 2012 at 11:05 PM.
May 22nd, 2012, 11:14 PM #3
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Outside the box
- Blog Entries
I thought we had this discussion before but I guess it was about DVD's. As I said in that post any media has it's pluses and minuses. If you are looking at long term back-up plans having several hdd's sitting around isn't ideal. Sure you have the extra storage space but the drives themselves take up more space and have their own specific issues.
If you are moving around a lot and prone to accidents like me, you risk dropping one drive, with all your data and loosing everything, as apposed to loosing one BD or DVD with only partial data lose, or that is backed-up elsewhere. Think of it this way, you lose one drive with 500GBs and all your data at $100 I lose one DVD with 4.5GBs at .10. Which of us is better of
Its not as simple as saying there is a perfect cure all for everything. You just weight the benefits of each, and if the data is really that important hopefully choose a couple options just in case.
Last edited by RicheemxX; May 22nd, 2012 at 11:16 PM.
May 22nd, 2012, 11:52 PM #4
Or spend the money on on a cloud storage option.
June 1st, 2012, 08:34 PM #5
I'd need 20 BDs to back-up 500gb hd. That is far less than 114 DVDs, but at a higher cost. Using DL BDs will decrease that to 10, but at even higher cost.
June 1st, 2012, 10:02 PM #6
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Outside the box
- Blog Entries
I think you are kind of missing my point. It all depends on what we are talking about backing up and what kind of availability/portability I need.
So say I have 5-10gb of photos or music. If I need them to be portable I could back them up for pennies on the dollar on both an external and for portability an optical solution. I loose one disk I'm only out that data rather than if I loose one drive, I loose everything!
If you are just talking total system and no need for portability then sure you could have redundant drives and store one off-site but IMO that is a major pain in the arse. How often are you going to be running back and forth trying to keep your off-site drive updated so you know you have a current back up? If you are going to do that then you might as well go with Biz's suggestion and use cloud storage. Then you'd know your back-up and off-site are both current. IMO if you have the network capabilities that would be the best overall solution!
This is what most companies do. Redundant drives on-site and a total online off-site solution.
edit: I guess what I'm saying is you really have to put it into to context as to what you are backing up and look at it as to what your individual needs are. Ideally though you'd want to go with more than one option. I for example have most of my important family photo's saved online, on disks that are easily shared, on my computer and by way of having my pc backed-up on my external drive.
My system files aren't irreplaceable so I only back my system up to my external. Its still on-site so should something totally unlucky happen like a fire I'd loose both my PC and my back-up. But the irreplaceable stuff is still of-site.
Last edited by RicheemxX; June 1st, 2012 at 10:32 PM.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By Stoneylloyd in forum Storage RelatedReplies: 2Last Post: February 9th, 2009, 02:07 PM
By Rootstonian in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 10Last Post: September 12th, 2008, 02:05 PM
By Rootstonian in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 4Last Post: February 11th, 2008, 10:16 AM
By J1mmy in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 9Last Post: January 23rd, 2008, 04:52 PM
By jfwy in forum General Gaming DiscussionReplies: 3Last Post: January 6th, 2002, 10:39 AM