I'm thinking of getting external storage to keep my family photos. Which type of storage would be better?(also which is better overall?)
>>108613442SSD
>>108613442Bro you definitely need raidz3 for what I will guess is less than 2GB of photos
>>108613442Enterprise SSD. Data retention times in cold storage are usually ~ 10 yrs for that type of storage. As additional failsafe option, consider blu ray or m disc dvd though. you can store them offsite in less than perfect conditions for decades
SSD Can't have you buying up all my HDDs in this economy.
>>108613442magnetic tapes, seriously
>>108613442How about a fucking photo album you zoomer retard?
>>108613723The tape player is too expensive man.
>>108613442DNA digital data storage
>>108613442HDD has no "shelf life", per se.You can leave them unplugged for DECADES, and unless you have a mass flood or earth quake that throws it around, it will most likely still work just fine.Meanwhile, you MUST keep SSD powered up, or at least "refresh" it by plugging it once a year or so, as otherwise it WILL start losing data.There's also varying read/write limits per bit on SSD, meaning individual bytes do "wear down" with use. They also cost WAY MORE than HDDs; something like 1TB can cost upwards of 200 bucks these days thanks to the component shortage issue caused by AI data farms, where as you can get 8TB HDD for like 100 dollaroos or less.The only pro of SSD is there being no moving parts, meaning they're arguably a tad more resistant to physical abuse, such as drops on the floor. But if you don't move your storage device much at all, an external USB HDD or a HDD HUB are arguably the best bang for your buck.
>>108613442consumer nas, 2 chunky satas, raid, replace disk when one fails, both failing at the same time is nearly impossible
Get the photos physically printer and photo album them you braindead retard
>>108613442HDD is more reliable
>>108614410It is possible for HDDs to get their read heads stuck if they are not used for a long time, but granted I've never personally seen such a case. I've had drives stay idle for 10-15 years and still work fine, and that's including sub-gigabyte models.
>>108613505>ssd>cold storagelmao
>>108613442Actual honest to God answer from someone who uses external storage a lot: SSD.Why?I've had ~5 external hard drives. All the HDD ones didn't die because of usage, they died because of physical damage. SSD are way more resilient to that and that makes them just way better for connecting to a laptop via an external enclosure.
>>108615282>they died because of physical damagewhat the fuck did you do? HDD's don't just get damaged from normal handling
>>108615332I used it with my laptop, so it sometimes fell down or I accidentally hit it on something
>>108613442store them across devices, in case one is failing you
>>108615267you fell for the reddit memes of SSDs being terrible for long term storage. Some enterprise SSDs are explicitly engineered for decades cold storage.
>>108615543and the same goes for SD cards, to a lesser extent. https://www.swissbit.com/data/S-56u/S-56u_fact_sheet.pdf
>>108615543such as? link?
>>108614410disk drives have gaskets that dry out
>>108613442>keep my family photosThe answer is DVD, or preferably m-disc.Archival grade optical media is orders of magnitude more stable for long-term cold storage, than any form of electronic or magnetic drive.
