Data Hoarder

168 readers

1 users here now

We are digital librarians. Among us are represented the various reasons to keep data -- legal requirements, competitive requirements, uncertainty of permanence of cloud services, distaste for transmitting your data externally (e.g. government or corporate espionage), cultural and familial archivists, internet collapse preppers, and people who do it themselves so they're sure it's done right. Everyone has their reasons for curating the data they have decided to keep (either forever or For A Damn Long Time (tm) ). Along the way we have sought out like-minded individuals to exchange strategies, war stories, and cautionary tales of failures.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Why are 100 GB Blu-rays so much more expensive? (alien.top)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have recently thought about burning some data to Blu-ray and therefore looked for some cheap blank discs. To my surprise, higher density Blu-rays seem to be much more expensive than lower density ones. In my country (Germany) for example, I could buy a 25 GB BD for 0,44€. A 100 GB BD would cost me 8,77€! At that price, it would be more efficient to store 100 GB on four 25 GB discs instead of one 100 GB disc (1,76€ vs. 8,77€). Sure, if it is one file I would have to split it first and combine it again when I want to access the data, but that effort seems to be worth it.

Why are high capacity Blu-rays so much more expensive, especially compared to HDDs or SSDs where the price per GB/TB usually drops with higher capacity?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (8 children)

Just curious as to why you're looking to store that much data on a high capacity Blu-ray disc (BDXL) as opposed to flash storage, SSD or a hard disk. The medium, as you've come to find out, is expensive and from what I understand you need a specific optical drive to read BDXL media. I know these discs use a non-organic material but I question how resistant it really is to the elements. Disc rot, though not common by any means but much more common than bitrot I feel, is something I'd try to avoid.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Suggesting SSD/flash for archive “cold” storage is uh, not good. SSD/flash drives are temperature sensitive, and have a lifespan of no longer than 2 years if they are not turned on periodically. For someone looking into optical storage, I’d bet a healthy wager they are looking to put some of the most important data in a closet somewhere in case of their traditional HDD setup(s) failing catastrophically. It’s not a bad idea. HDDs are also fine for “cold” storage as well, but they’re still mechanical, and having something mechanical sit there for years and turned on after a long period of time sometimes doesn’t work out well.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

SSD/flash drives [...] have a lifespan of no longer than 2 years if they are not turned on periodically.

What, really?!?!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

pretty much, especially QLC drives or cheap flashdrives/sd cards.

Even back in the 2D TLC days, i had flash drives with read errors after less than 7 months of no power.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

i had flash drives with read errors after less than 7 months of no power.

That explains a lot!!! Thanks

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

3D nand is a lot more stable unpowered, but not the cheap storage.

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)