Frankly, I find discussions of "archival media" amusing. If you had an "archival" 5 1/2-inch floppy, where would you read it now, less than 20 years later?
Suppose you could find a drive, how would your computer interpret a vintage WordStar document? Heck, even the current MSWord for the Mac can't open Word 1.05 documents (and good luck finding a compatible floppy drive!). Our digital photos will "turn into pumpkins" because of technological change, not because of media deterioration. That bothers me; I can look at the slides my father took when I was a kid 50 years ago, and my kids can look at the slides I took of them 50 years from now, but who will be able to look at the pix I've taken with my ist D since March in another 10 years? Maybe not even me! It is a definite "down side" of digital photography. Rick --- John Celio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://adterrasperaspera.com/blog/2006/10/30/how-to-choose-cddvd-archival-media/ > > The author is a little biased towards one import > brand, but he gives good > reasons, and his technical insight into writable > optical media is worth the > read. > > John > > -- > http://www.neovenator.com > http://www.cafepress.com/neovenatorphoto > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > http://www.photo.net/photos/RickW ____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
