You continue to repeat the same flimsy arguments to justify the decision I suspect you came to before you even started this thread. As you've pointed out, we're talking about cold storage scenarios, yet you use arguments that aren't especially applicable. A power surge, shipping damage, a bad PSU, and incompetent technicians aren't likely to impact a drive that's stored disconnected in your closet. Defects and bad designs are absolutely a possibility, that's why I suggested multiple different drives. Defects and bad design are also applicable to optical media.
Everything will fail at some point. That's why we make backups. You talk about the benefits of scattering data over multiple disks. I fully agree! It's just that your scenario scatters ONE set of data over ~150 mostly identical discs. My similarly priced suggestion scatters THREE complete sets of data over three different drives. My scenario requires FOUR simultaneous failures (1 original + 3 backups) for any data loss to occur. Yours only requires two.
You continue to incorrectly claim that data recovery from a faulty hard drive is almost impossible. This is simply untrue. I'm not even an expert and I've recovered data from numerous failing hard drives (even an SD card), some of which other technicians (also not data recovery experts) had written off as unsalvageable. From a data recovery perspective, hard drives are often viewed more favorably than SSDs (and other flash-based media) because they are less likely to fail as abruptly. It's not unusual to get some warning before serious data loss occurs. That's the main point of SMART (despite its generally terrible implementation).
Yes, this thread is quite tedious. But, I agree, any backup is better than none. It would take a small forest's worth of newspapers for all the people I need to whack on the nose for not backing up. It's even more frustrating when I set everything up and tell them "just plug this in and press the big green button once a month."
To add some levity...
Magical space aliens are a good idea! Everyone talks about off-site backups. Why not consider storing them off-world?
I tried cloud backups but all my data kept evaporating.
Everything will fail at some point. That's why we make backups. You talk about the benefits of scattering data over multiple disks. I fully agree! It's just that your scenario scatters ONE set of data over ~150 mostly identical discs. My similarly priced suggestion scatters THREE complete sets of data over three different drives. My scenario requires FOUR simultaneous failures (1 original + 3 backups) for any data loss to occur. Yours only requires two.
You continue to incorrectly claim that data recovery from a faulty hard drive is almost impossible. This is simply untrue. I'm not even an expert and I've recovered data from numerous failing hard drives (even an SD card), some of which other technicians (also not data recovery experts) had written off as unsalvageable. From a data recovery perspective, hard drives are often viewed more favorably than SSDs (and other flash-based media) because they are less likely to fail as abruptly. It's not unusual to get some warning before serious data loss occurs. That's the main point of SMART (despite its generally terrible implementation).
Yes, this thread is quite tedious. But, I agree, any backup is better than none. It would take a small forest's worth of newspapers for all the people I need to whack on the nose for not backing up. It's even more frustrating when I set everything up and tell them "just plug this in and press the big green button once a month."
To add some levity...
Magical space aliens are a good idea! Everyone talks about off-site backups. Why not consider storing them off-world?
I tried cloud backups but all my data kept evaporating.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram