barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) (04/26/91)
Suppose you were going to put some audio recordings and computer
media into a "time box" for 25 years. At the end of 25 years, people would
open the box and look at/listen to the stuff inside.
In 25 years, what media are the most likely to be READABLE?
For music:
cassette tape?
vinyl record?
DAT?
VHS?
reel-to-reel?
CD? (Not really an option, since we need to record our own
music on it.)
For computers:
3.5" disk? For which computer?
5.25" disk?
9-track tape? tar?
Punch cards? :-)
Optical disk?
A naive answer would be "whatever is newest". But the newest
technologies (optical disks, for example) have been around only a short time;
perhaps they'll be totally obsolete later, and the older stuff (reel-to-reel
tape) abundant enough to justify keeping tape-players/readers around.
Not many 8" floppy disk drives are available for PC's these days;
only 10 short years ago....
E-mail is preferred -- thanks!
Dan
//////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
| Dan Barrett - Systems Administrator, Computer Science Department |
| The Johns Hopkins University, 34th and Charles Sts., Baltimore, MD 21218 |
| INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | |
| COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP |
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) (05/02/91)
In article <8144@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: > > Suppose you were going to put some audio recordings and computer >media into a "time box" for 25 years. At the end of 25 years, people would >open the box and look at/listen to the stuff inside. > > In 25 years, what media are the most likely to be READABLE? >For music: > cassette tape? > vinyl record? > DAT? > VHS? > reel-to-reel? > CD? (Not really an option, since we need to record our own > music on it.) Vinyl, definitely, assuming reasonable temperatures. I have vinyl much older than that which still sounds like new. Watch out for tape and similar media. A lot of the record company archives are in terrible shape. Some of the worst problems seem to have come from what was considered to be the best tape. The oxide falls off. The tape sticks together. A strong magnetic field can wipe them, and so on. In spite of this, I have tape well over 25 years old which seems to be okay, so it may work. CDs could separate; some laser discs did early on -- pit rot. Opticals may have the same problem. I don't know how they are constructed, but if they are equal to CD or better, opticals and a NeXT would be an option. Of course you have to assume there will be equipment to read them in 25 years! Another vote for vinyl. >For computers: > 3.5" disk? For which computer? > 5.25" disk? > 9-track tape? tar? > Punch cards? :-) > Optical disk? I vote for paper. It can be read by hand if necessary. Punch cards lasted for extremely long periods of very heavy abuse. As above, I would avoid magnetic media. CD Rom and optical discs are a possibility, as above. -- Bob Peirce, Pittsburgh, PA rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us 412-471-5320 venetia@investor.pgh.pa.us [NeXT Mail] ...!uunet!pitt!investor!rbp [UUCP]
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us> rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes: > CD Rom and optical discs are a possibility, as above. CD-yes. Optical disk, maybe. Only if you're dealing with a mechanical write- once thingy. Read/write opticals are probably no better than magnetic... you want a non- erasable medium. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
sven@cs.widener.edu (Sven Heinicke) (05/06/91)
In <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us>, rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us writes: >In article <8144@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: >> Suppose you were going to put some audio recordings and computer >>media into a "time box" for 25 years. At the end of 25 years, people would >>open the box and look at/listen to the stuff inside. > >I vote for paper. It can be read by hand if necessary. Punch cards >lasted for extremely long periods of very heavy abuse. I don't know about paper either, a lot of books that I have that are more then 10 years old are comming apart. Is punch card paper made from low acid paper? If not they will not last to long either. -- sven@cs.widener.edu Widener CS system manager Sven Mike Heinicke and Student (pssmheinicke@cyber.widener.edu (if you must))
wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) (05/06/91)
I recall this discussion going on in the post nuclear holocaust book _On_the_Beach. Seems to me they used etched glass, enclosed inside a glass block. I don't think that would be very random accessible, however, and I've never seen a WORM jukebox that could handle glass block:-} -- A host is a host from coast to coast.....wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu & no one will talk to a host that's close............(305) 255-RTFM Unless the host (that isn't close)......................pob 570-335 is busy, hung or dead....................................33257-0335
afoiani@nmsu.edu (Anthony "Tkil" Foiani) (05/06/91)
Hmm... When I read the original post, I interpreted it to mean "For what media will facilities be commonly available to read it 25 years from now" instead of "What media will keep data non-corrupted over the time span of 25 years?" The second has been hashed over already, and I thought I'd comment on the first. Many types of media commonly available 25 [or fewer] years ago can't be read by a typical setup. Audio 78rpms and 8-track, computer 8" floppies, punch cards, punch tape, etc. As for what current media will be in use in 25 years: CD [12cm, 9cm(3in?), Laserdisc] I think these will still be around, despite the arrival of digital tapes. Regardless of the encoding of a magnetic tape, there is [currently] an amount of wear on the media. CD technology is non- contact, and the current production techniques result in stable discs that should last 50-100 years DAT, Phillips' Digital Cassettes This technology, or some derivative, will survive. The ability to record either parts of CDs or real events is necessary and desireable. Although they wear out, they still have excellent sound quality for a relatively long time. Write-once, Read/write [Magneto-Optical] CDs Only if the technology advances; it won't be in common usage for at least another 5-10 years for audio information. May be around for a while, though. Vinyl There will probably be some die-hard audiophiles who have turn- tables, but not many. Vinyl holds up well with age, but so do CDs pressed since the mid-80s, and the sound quality... Well, that's about it for now... please comment. I'm no type of engineer, btw. heh. Tony -- Tony Foiani a.k.a. Tkil (afoiani@nmsu.edu) or (mcsajf@nmsuvm1.bitnet) Supporting: Unix / DOS / VMS / Macintosh / "What's this?" "As the water flows over the bridge, | As we walk on the Floodland | "Rain From Heaven" As we walk on the water, we forget | _Gift_ We forget. Rain from Heaven." | The Sisterhood
dtb@adpplz.UUCP (Tom Beach) (05/06/91)
In article <7DF+PQ+@cs.widener.edu>, sven@cs.widener.edu (Sven Heinicke) writes: > In <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us>, rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us writes: > >> Suppose you were going to put some audio recordings and computer > >>media into a "time box" for 25 years. At the end of 25 years, people would > >>open the box and look at/listen to the stuff inside. > > I don't know about paper either, a lot of books that I have that are > more then 10 years old are comming apart. Is punch card paper made > from low acid paper? If not they will not last to long either. > I still have boxes of computer punch cards from when I was in college. That's WELL over 25 yrs ago, trust me! They're in pristine condition. I have no idea where I could get them read today, but if I could find a place with a card reader, they would read absolutely error free!! Much of the popular press, read paperbacks, are printed on low cost high acid content paper which as noted has trouble lasting 10 years, much less 25. On the other hand, good quality hardbound books will last >100 yrs with no special archival care needed. From an archival standpoint there's NO doubt in my mind that punch cards are a FAR FAR better choice than magnetic media! Tom Beach ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Tom Beach : Sr Project Engineer : Mass Storage Technology | | phone : (503) 294-1541 | | email : uunet : dtb@adpplz.uucp | | ADP Dealer Services, ADP Plaza, 2525 S.W. 1st Ave, Portland OR, 97201 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (05/07/91)
In article <7DF+PQ+@cs.widener.edu> sven@cs.widener.edu (Sven Heinicke) writes: | I don't know about paper either, a lot of books that I have that are | more then 10 years old are comming apart. Is punch card paper made | from low acid paper? If not they will not last to long either. I wouldn't bet that you can get card readers in 25 years, but I have card decks older than that which are still in fine condition. Let's assume that if anyone cares you could read them with optical if you had to. Now look at the durability of vinyl... I have records 60+ years old which have only deteriorated by playing, but the vinyl they use today is not really as good. I'd either go for paper or DAT+ECC. I have lots of tapes I made in the 50's which are still playable, if not free from defects. If you want digital quality I'd go paper. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
brian@bjm.wimsey.bc.ca (Brian J. Murrell) (05/07/91)
rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes: >In article <8144@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: >> >> Suppose you were going to put some audio recordings and computer >>media into a "time box" for 25 years. At the end of 25 years, people would >>open the box and look at/listen to the stuff inside. >> >> In 25 years, what media are the most likely to be READABLE? >>For music: >> cassette tape? >> vinyl record? >> DAT? >> VHS? >> reel-to-reel? >> CD? (Not really an option, since we need to record our own >> music on it.) BTW what is Nostradamus' (Sp?) email address <:') ?? / a "dunce cap" maybe? -- __________ ___ ____ _________________________________________________ / / / /| /| (604)520-3808 uunet!van-bc!bjm!brian /--: / / | / | New Westminster B.C. _______ /__/ /__/ / |/ | _________________________________________________
root@bjm.wimsey.bc.ca (0000-Admin(0000)) (05/07/91)
rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes: >In article <8144@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: >> >> Suppose you were going to put some audio recordings and computer >>media into a "time box" for 25 years. At the end of 25 years, people would >>open the box and look at/listen to the stuff inside. >> >> In 25 years, what media are the most likely to be READABLE? >>For music: >> cassette tape? >> vinyl record? >> DAT? >> VHS? >> reel-to-reel? >> CD? (Not really an option, since we need to record our own >> music on it.) BTW what is Nostradamus' (Sp?) email address <:') ?? / a "dunce cap" maybe?
sven@cs.widener.edu (Sven Heinicke) (05/08/91)
To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com Subject: Re: What medium will be readable in 25 years? Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.periphs,rec.music.cd,rec.music.misc In-Reply-To: <P73BU7@xds13.ferranti.com> References: <8144@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us> Organization: Widener CS Dept Cc: Bcc: In article <P73BU7@xds13.ferranti.com> you write: >In article <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us> rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes: >> CD Rom and optical discs are a possibility, as above. > >Read/write opticals are probably no better than magnetic... you want a non- >erasable medium. I find that tapestries might be a good solution if you don't need exact binary code. There are still left over from the middle ages. And people are working on decoding dna from millions of years ago using probility to detect mutations in the mitocondra (sp?), I think I saw a PBS program talking about this, whitch I could remeber whitch one. -- sven@cs.widener.edu Widener CS system manager Sven Mike Heinicke and Student (pssmheinicke@cyber.widener.edu (if you must)) -- sven@cs.widener.edu Widener CS system manager Sven Mike Heinicke and Student (pssmheinicke@cyber.widener.edu (if you must))
new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) (05/08/91)
There are two basic questions being asked here: 1) What medium will survive 25 years of storage? 2) What medium will have readers available in 25 years? If you are most interested in (2), supplying your own reader seems the simplest solution. For example, put a cassette player into the time capsule along with the tapes, and document the I/O characteristics (power supply, output levels, etc) of it, allowing somebody to build an interface if necessary. If you are interested in (1), it seems that a capsule with an inert gas could preserve paper well for 25 years easily. After all, we still dig up papyrus from thousands of years ago in deserts. I've seen articles on building barcode readers for pennies. It seems like barcode hardcopy would be the best solution for me, unless of course you have no control over the environment where things will be stored. -- Darren -- --- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware --- ----- Network Protocols, Graphics, Programming Languages, FDTs ----- +=+ Nails work better than screws, when both are driven with hammers +=+
sampson@cod.NOSC.MIL (Charles H. Sampson) (05/08/91)
Is _anybody_ reading rec.music.cd or even rec.music.misc interested
in this thread?
Charliemjd@saul.cis.upenn.edu (The Man Who Knew Too Much) (05/08/91)
I'm not so sure how germane this is to the original question, but
perhaps it's worth poting out that we have thousands and thousands of
useless and intolerably dull contracts and bills of sale and legal
records and whatnot left over from the Babylonians (c. 1500 BC) written
in cuneiform on dried clay tablets, and that no particular care was
taken to preserve this mostly useless junk; it just stuck around of its
own accord.
Now admittedly cuneiform is a low-density medium, but our
technology's improved a little, and we could probably get quite a few
bits on a slab of clay, or better yet, macro-defect-free cement.
--
Nihil tam absurde dici potest, quod non dicatur ab aliquo philosophorum.
Mark-Jason Dominus mjd@central.cis.upenn.edu smb@data.com (Steven M. Boker) (05/08/91)
In article <B+H+4FG@cs.widener.edu> sven@cs.widener.edu (Sven Heinicke) writes: >In article <P73BU7@xds13.ferranti.com> you write: >>In article <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us> rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes: >>> CD Rom and optical discs are a possibility, as above. >> >>Read/write opticals are probably no better than magnetic... you want a non- >>erasable medium. > Back in 1985 I sat on a panel at COMDEX with a fellow from the Smithsonian Museum. They asked themselves the very same question. They have masses of documents that are rapidly deteriorating and were looking to preserve them for future generations. The solution that they came up with is a hardened, etched glass master that can be used to press CD-ROM's. They are committed to preserving the technology to read these CD-ROM's for the next hundred years or so. (Or until the budget runs out :-} ) Steve -- #====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====# # Steve Boker # "Two's bifurcation # # smb@data.com # but three's chaotic" # #====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#====#
bold@astroatc.UUCP (Jeff Beck) (05/09/91)
What medium? Etch it in stone, just like cavemen did :-) -- ****************************************************************************** * Jason Bold - Madison,WI= [(rutgers||ames)!uwvax||att!nicmad]!astroatc!bold * * "A strawberry mind, a body that's built for two" - Michael Hedges * ******************************************************************************
kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) (05/09/91)
In article <P73BU7@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >In article <1991May1.174841.3321@investor.pgh.pa.us> rbp@investor.pgh.pa.us (Bob Peirce #305) writes: >> CD Rom and optical discs are a possibility, as above. > >CD-yes. Optical disk, maybe. Only if you're dealing with a mechanical write- >once thingy. > >Read/write opticals are probably no better than magnetic... you want a non- >erasable medium. Not true. You need both a magnetic fiedl and a laser of the correct wavelenght to erase the medium. I'd say it was as much better than magnetic. With magnetic media just presenting it to a strong electric or magnetic field could destroy your data. >-- >Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com >+1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?" -- /* -The opinions expressed are my own, not my employers. */ /* For I can only express my own opinions. */ /* */ /* Kent L. Shephard : email - kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com */
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/10/91)
In article <7f3J02pY07aM01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes: > In article <P73BU7@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > >Read/write opticals are probably no better than magnetic... you want a non- > >erasable medium. > Not true. You need both a magnetic fiedl and a laser of the correct > wavelenght to erase the medium. The problem isn't so much immediate erasure by an accidental occurrence (such as nuclear war), but self-erasure over time. Mechanical storage methods have a considerable advantage over those that involve molecular changes in the medium. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
will@rins.ryukoku.ac.jp (will) (05/13/91)
In article <197B26C@xds13.ferranti.com>, peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >The problem isn't so much immediate erasure by an accidental occurrence (such >as nuclear war), but self-erasure over time. Mechanical storage methods have >a considerable advantage over those that involve molecular changes in the >medium. > Which brings to attention one simple little detail that everyone has over-looked. Will there be someone around in 25 years to open it up and make everyone famous. I think you guys should consider long term thinking just in case. Will....
roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) (05/15/91)
Another problem with mag tape stored for long periods is print-through, where the magnetic field on one surface begins to magnetize adjacent surfaces. It's not a problem when tapes are used periodically since the same areas never line up exactly the same way after one rewinding as on the next, but on tapes stored unused for long periods, the "image" degradation can be very noticeable. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Email: roger@wet.UUCP | * * alt: rogerd@well | witty remark designed to exhibit intellect goes * * CompuServe: 72730,1010 | here *