>>109633698
backup not update

>>109633699
no they cost more per gb so just buy HDDs instead

I have IDE drives still fine, the degradation factor is hype, but maybe BD might handle nuclear war better

>>109633698
They're good only for backups. M-DISCs are best for long term backups or stuff that isn't going to change, like your fave OS.iso, music, vidya gaems etc. Regular discs are better for short term storage and backups, read as up to 10 years, while M-DISCs should last until your retirement arrives and even further.
Keep in mind that M-DISCs require special DVD/BD WRITERS but can be read by any DVD/BD reader.

>>109633698
>>109633699
Yes but only if they're cheaper per GB compared to hard drives

>>109633698
I'd say they are, but only for relatively small quantities of data. Those 100GB discs you posted are still low capacity comparatively, use physically more space and are slow to write compared to HDDs. For relatively small quantities of important data, I'd say they can be worthwhile but if you're looking at relatively large amounts of data (multiple TBs) they become less and less practical.

The smaller 25GB discs are better in terms of value but the smaller size also makes them even less practical.

>>109633749
>M-DISCs
Ignore this idiot. Blu-Ray M-DISCs are identical to (or worse) than regular BD-R media. When it comes to BD-XL, the Verbatim M-DISCs are actually WORSE than the Sony BD-XL discs
>Keep in mind that M-DISCs require special DVD/BD WRITERS
Was never true for BD either, because again, the discs are just regular fucking Blu-Ray with a retard tax.

>BD-XL
Anyone recommend a good writer for these?

>>109633924
Pioneer and LG exited the market so I literally have no idea who’s currently manufacturing things like Verbatim Blu-Ray drives

>>109633969
IIRC it's Hitachi-LG BU40N and there are supply issues with those as well. You're basically SOL if you want to get a 4K capable Blu-Ray drive today, I got a BW-16D1HT for cheap, brand new, before they went out of production as well.

>>109633783
Yes they do, you buffoon. DVD M-DISCs are chemically different from the regular organic dye DVDs and require significantly more potent lasers to burn data reliably. BD M-DISCs do not require specialized certification, indeed, but DVD M-DISCs do in fact require more power than their regular DVD counterparts. After a quick search, most modern DVD/BD drives do support M-DISCs of any kind, yet the only guaranteed drives are those that are certified to burn M-DISCs.
I am not that well versed on BDs and their M-DISC variants, yet you are not to contradict me on DVDs and DVD M-DISCs for I've searched everything about them, from official marketing and specifications, to practical tests, to user experiences and up to military experimentation, otherwise I wouldn't've bought a dedicated M-DISC RW drive for my machine instead of the regular DVD-RW drive that you can find everywhere.
>inb4 put more power into the laser you dumb fuck
I have the warranty that my drive isn't going to fail or burn out simply by attempting to increase the laser's power beyond its chemically safe thermal point, and I severely doubt that there are any surviving DVD-RW drives from over 10 years ago that burnt dozens of M-DISCs successfully and without the laser diode failing.

>>109633698
I have a ton of blank dvds/cds I got for next to nothing 7 years ago
with hdds going up in price I'm gonna have to start burning

File: file.jpg (258 KB, 1600x1600)

258 KB JPG

>>109633698
Take it this way:

Discs are resistant to EMPs and other shit that would wreck digital systems that rely on electricity.
The M-Discs are also rot resistant. Parts of data on discs can be "dug out" with a literal microscope, even if you crack and split them into pieces.
BDs unfortunately have fallen into this annoying niche of being pointlessly more expensive than CDs and DVDs, just because Sony wants to get rid of them now.

That being said, it is (still) not hard to find hardware capable of reading and writing that stuff. The backwards compatibility with the older discs also makes it a great way of accessing data and media from the past < 50 years.

Also, DVDs being the most popular spinning media since the late 1990s means that most households have a way of reading them in one way or another. That 4.7GB may sound anemic and restrictive this day and age, but with some smart cherry picking and modern compression methods, you could throw shittons of data into a single DVD.

For example, some ooold pre-2010's H264 TV anime episodes (~24 min) were like 200-300 Megs at 720p/30fps back in the day. Run those through Handbrake and transform them into 10-bit HEVC with OPUS audio, and you can get very serviceable quality at mere ~100 Megabytes, or LESS.
If you're afraid of not being able to access the data later, just include a zipped version of VLC or the latest K-Lite pack, Linux and Windows versions.

If you just want to store random text docs, PDFs and shit, or even more geeky stuff like plain 3D models in .OBJ or .FBX format, you'll easily jam thousands of such files onto a DVD alone.

>>109635106
>Also, DVDs being the most popular spinning media since the late 1990s means that most households have a way of reading them in one way or another
You're living in the past, there are barely any device left to read DVDs. I even had to buy a DVD reader to read my old stuff.

It depends, for backups HDDs are better because they are cheap, for movies, well it depends.
I have some movies in 1080p stored in DVD5 -R discs and they are much cheaper than any HDD
>>109634650
Do they make non 4k bluray writer for a cheaper price?
>>109635615
You should had bought a DVD writer to your PC, they still make external generic chink DVD driver that can read all your old stuff and write new stuff, instead of buying a TV DVD player
>>109635106
>BDs unfortunately have fallen into this annoying niche of being pointlessly more expensive than CDs and DVDs, just because Sony wants to get rid of them now.
Unfortunately bluray won the format war and has monopoly on high capacity disc market, l wish Toshiba didn't abandoned HD DVD discs

>>109633718
>>109633775
>>109633781

You dumb fucking niggers. They are for stable, long-term storage of valuable data. The size is not the point.

>>109635615

You are especially a fucking nigger. You can breathe and find a DVD reader and writer. The hardware faggots just separated them from the PC towers.

File: refcard.png (896 KB, 1920x1080)

896 KB PNG

>>109633698
I just recently bought them for backup of important data that never changes (certificates and all that shit).
I found it really nice and I might buy some more blu rays to backup all my movies.
Should be fine if I just store them as data on there. Over the years I downloaded so many pointless movies. A lot of them were never watched. But I don't want to delete them. WHAT IF I WANT TO WATCH THEM SOME DAY???
So yeah, I think it's a good idea. I am a faggot tho

>>109633698
wait, you dont store your porn on 200 dvd's sorted by alphabet?

>>109635938
>>109635106
Their patent expires in 2 years, soon BDs will be able to be produced without monopoly tax

>>109633698
It's great for reinstalling OS.
>inb4 Ventoy
My Thinkpad refuses to install shit from it and I don't trust the software.

>>109635106
>That being said, it is (still) not hard to find hardware capable of reading and writing that stuff.
yes it is unless you live in some very dense american or japanese city.
it's impossible to find good working drives for normal price, it's the same with VCR.
no one is making them anymore so it does not really matter if you can still get them, you won't be able to read any of this shit in 30 years anyways
>>109636453
>The hardware faggots just separated them from the PC towers.
>just
absolutely wrong, recent external drives are of worse quality than peak pioneer and lg internal drives and they're making less of them as time passes.
lifespan of these things are very short too.
>But I don't want to delete them. WHAT IF I WANT TO WATCH THEM SOME DAY???
yes, do NOT delete data, ever.
>>109638601
it's because your computer is in uefi-only with csm disabled but you made your ventoy stick for MBR disks (the default option in ventoy)
remake your usb dingdong with gpt enabled.
option => partition style => GPT

>>109633698
>these things are suppose to last 50 years
will your bdplayer

File: 009659.jpg (213 KB, 1600x900)

213 KB JPG

>>109633698
>not using 5D crystals in 2026

>>109635033
I never mentioned DVDs. Reread my post you fucking knuckle dragger

>>109633749
>>109636453
But like whats the point of using them, if all the necessary parts total to 3x the costs of an external ssd drive with same space? I get they "last long" but if your just writing a back up to it a few times, its not like the SSD is going to die sooner. SSDs only die from frequent usage overtime, they dont shit out after a given time if rarely used.

>>109639342
ransomware proof, sudo rm -rf proof, dirty power proof, waterproof and probably a few other things.

>>109639214
you are a dumb femboy that implied that DVD M-DISCs never required anything but regular DVD-RW drives
>>Keep in mind that M-DISCs require special DVD/BD WRITERS
>Was never true for BD either
>for BD either
>either
this implies that DVD M-DISCs didn't require dedicated M-DISC drives you complete imbecile
>inb4 triples down like a mongrel
kys

>>109635615
>You're living in the past, there are barely any device left to read DVDs.
Not only are PC DVD drives littering the flea markets and online auction sites, but just about every single faggot has at least a Playstation 2, 3 or 4.
Hell, even an Xbox 360 or Xbone will do.

There's also shittons of sub-100 buck HP "student" laptops from the past 15 years you could grab while they're still out there.

>>109639342
My nigga in Christ, it literally is just for the reliability and lifespan. SSD's can't last your lifetime, but optical can.

x100 pack of DVD's totaling around half a terabyte costs like 25 bucks if you go to the right source, so price is less of an issue when an SSD of the same size costs at least three times more than that. The only real issue is the pain of dividing anything extremely large between multiple DVD's, but most people aren't gonna have to worry about that.

SSD's and optical have their own respective purposes. Both respective uses have their place.


>>109638797

>will your bdplayer

You are a massive nigger. The same argument can be made for ANY type of media. The current SSD types will certainly not be supported in 50 years, but you can certainly scrape data from an optical disk more easily than an ancient SSD or HDD 50 years from now.

>>109640407
>SSD's can't last your lifetime, but optical can.

Both "can" last your lifetime, but neither will. I've had plenty of dead optical discs, it's the reason I switched to archiving on HDDs. At least with HDDs you can get early warning, or set them up with redundancy. With optical it's a toss up if the discs you have sitting on the shelf are still readable.

PRESSED original optical discs may actually last your life time, but burned ones won't, and if you can't burn discs then there is little point to discussing their merits for archival.

>>109640407
>he current SSD types will certainly not be supported in 50 years

eh, current SSDs use PCI Express directly and it would need to be a huge paradigm shift in computing for that to be not supported any time soon. SATA may die out in our life time but there are plenty of PCIE to SATA chips. Not to mention USB drives which may be around longer than PCIE.

If you count converters then I can still read data from the IDE drive in my 486DX which dates to the mid 1990s, so 30+ years. SCSI is more problematic, but not impossible.

The only drives I actually couldn't read data off of in recent years was a MFM drive from the 1980s. But there would be nothing worth in one of those, unless it's on one of those ancient systems that still runs a subway in Japan or something.

>>109640691
>reason I switched to archiving on HDDs

I was talking about SSD's in comparison to optical, not HDD's.

>At least with HDDs you can get early warning, or set them up with redundancy.

Yes it is true that they are good for archival.
However, DVD's are cheaper to replace every 5 years (for safety, though they can generally go much longer) than HDD's. Additionally, they are hands off archival compared to HDD's. Since my data needs not connect to the internet, I have little need personally for that mode of archival. However, this applies generally to most people as well. Naturally, if your data needs to be dynamically interacted with, HDD is obviously a necessity.

>>109638573
Really?!!
Any link about this?

>>109640763
The broader methods will not change, but the particulars are bound to change quite a bit in half a century. It's mostly a matter of convenience in my opinion as optical storage will be less prone to changes in how it is read and written; a laser in 2026 will still be a laser in 2076.

>>109638784
> "no one is making them anymore"
that is not true, got an LG drive with june 2026 as manufacturing date.

>>109640763
>eh, current SSDs use PCI Express directly and it would need to be a huge paradigm shift in computing for that to be not supported any time soon
it's a common myth that pcie is always backwards compatible, got some pcie 3 nvme drives refusing to work on pcie 5 slots. as i learned the hard way, there are protocol specifics motherboard manufacturers need to properly implement for this to work

>>109640777
>I was talking about SSD's in comparison to optical, not HDD's.
I meant all data storage that you can use today. I have SSDs that lasted longer than burned DVDs, but also seen plenty of dead SSDs of course.

Also one thing I forgot, optical drives need servicing such as needing a new fucking belt. Most drives I have need a new one. And their pickups fail all the time.

>However, DVD's are cheaper to replace every 5 years
Yeah if you do not value your time whatsoever. How long would it take to replace 4TB worth of DVDs vs a HDD? Weeks of nonstop work vs getting it done overnight.

>Additionally, they are hands off archival compared to HDD's
So disconnect them from your machine, or disconnect the machine they are in from the internet. I have a stack of drives sitting on the shelf as offline backups, and a NAS that's blocked in the router from accessing the internet. Only reason it's not on a whole separate network altogether is because I don't have enough dedicated 2.5/10GbE ports so I have to share some. Can't fucking wait for 10GbE routing/switching to become commonplace.

>>109640797
>a laser in 2026 will still be a laser in 2076.
No, it will be a nonworking laser by 2076. Modern optical pickups are fucking garbage and barely last. A 10 year old DVD player that still reads everything fine without skipping is already a huge enough feat to find on ebay. Even high end shit like $3000 Marantz SACD players need pickup replacements because modern pickups are trash.

If you have a CD player with a single laser swing arm mechanic transport, okay, that one will last until 2076 no problem assuming you replace the electrolytic caps. Good luck finding a bluray drive with one.

>>109640900

> optical drives need servicing

Optical drives will probably stay in production for a long time due to general demand for optical media staying strong, even increasing due to Stop Killing Games and the DRM wars. New external optical drives are dirt cheap.

>value your time

Maintenance every half decade to simply copy some disks is less work than HDDs' frequent archive maintenance and diagnostics needs for safety reasons. Also nobody is dealing with TB levels of data when they're going for DVD archival unless they're expecting to sit down and get their hands dirty when transfer-day comes.

>disconnect them from your machine

How long can you leave an HDD on your shelf before having to do checkups compared to optical?

>>a laser in 2026 will still be a laser in 2076.

See paragraph 1. Also I did not mean literally the same specific laser, but instead one's produced in the future.

>>109633924
BD-XL fucking suck, you can get them ordered from japan and probably a quarter of them will be duds.

>>109640986
>Optical drives will probably stay in production for a long time due to general demand for optical media staying strong
Most companies stopped making optical drives, biggest one being Sony recently. Sorry, they are going the way of the dodo. There's no general demand for optical media any more, everyone is just streaming shit online now.

>Maintenance every half decade to simply copy some disks is less work than HDDs' frequent archive maintenance and diagnostics needs for safety reasons.
What's easier, powering on a hard drive once every year and letting it run a full self diagnostic overnight, or doing the same for 4TB or 8TB or 24TB worth of DVDs?

>How long can you leave an HDD on your shelf before having to do checkups compared to optical?
I had drives that sat idle for 10-20 years and worked just fine. I had DVD-Rs that died after half a year while sitting in a container.

>nobody is dealing with TB levels of data when they're going for DVD archival
Yeah but even a modern video game is like 20GB of data, not to mention HD movies, so how the fuck you archive those on DVDs? They are just not suitable for modern media needs.

>Also I did not mean literally the same specific laser, but instead one's produced in the future.
See paragraph 1. They won't be made forever.

I recommend just hoarding the modern 25GB verbatim discs. They are extremely reliable and will last 100 years, I've had entire spindles with 0 duds. They work on all blu ray drives, so just get a couple drives for backup, and you can get cheaper ones that only support single or dual layer.

>>109641011
>Most companies stopped making optical drives, biggest one being Sony recently. Sorry, they are going the way of the dodo. There's no general demand for optical media any more, everyone is just streaming shit online now.

Market vacuum; the response to Sony is negative. Streaming is becoming so shit even the normies are breaking.

>What's easier, powering on a hard drive once every year and letting it run a full self diagnostic overnight, or doing the same for 4TB or 8TB or 24TB worth of DVDs?

>>109640240
This anon's post. Also 3-2-1 rule. I never claimed that ALL of your data should be on DVD. It's like assuming that if I said I liked HDD's that I only use HDD's. Also yes, it's easier to do that every half decade when considering the benefits, at least for me.

>died after half a year while sitting in a container.

In an oil drum container? In all seriousness that's a brand issue, anon.

>Yeah but even a modern video game is like 20GB of data, not to mention HD movies, so how the fuck you archive those on DVDs? They are just not suitable for modern media needs.

Blu-ray comes in 50 and 100 G's. Bought as needed of course due to price difference.

>>Also I did not mean literally the same specific laser, but instead one's produced in the future.

See paragraph 1.

>>109641004
Pretty much my experience. The forth layer usually has super crappy writing and reading characteristics.

I see more potential for a non proprietary open optical volumetric storage using common blue/ green laser diodes in the future.

I used to work with people from optoelectronics, I hope someone in the industry is willing to put up the effort of developing an open hardware implementation.

BR is a dead end, long term

>>109638573
the real reason sony wants to kill physical media