4 ms·
160 years falls somewhat short of "forever"; as for the claims: how do you test for a 160 year lifespan, and more importantly: how will you read this in 160 yea
by Piskvorrr 14y ago
160 years falls somewhat short of "forever"; as for the claims: how do you test for a 160 year lifespan, and more importantly: how will you read this in 160 years, assuming it is still readable? I have 25-year-old 9" floppy disks, but I have no way to read them - no drives, and even if I scavenged one online, no computers with a compatible interface.
Even though it's an impressive claim, unless they can somehow provide a 160-year lifespan drive, I'm less than impressed.
- urza 14y agoSeems there is some kind of ECMA testing for this, they had the disk at 80 degrees Celsius and 80 % humidity for equivalent of 160 years at normal conditions. Dont ask me more, this is all there was to it in this article: [czech] http://technet.idnes.cz/cesi-jako-jedini-na-svete-vyrabi-dvd-disky-ktere-vas-dvakrat-preziji-11j-/tec_reportaze.aspx?c=A110502_120308_tec_reportaze_nyv http://technet.idnes.cz/cesi-jako-jedini-na-svete-vyrabi-dvd... You make a good point with the reader problem.
- Piskvorrr 14y agoMoreover, data compatibility gets hard - who can read EBCDIC-encoded data nowadays? Or even a keybcs2-encoded file written in the T602 editor (a format fifteen years old - and already completely obsolete)?