Whoa! CDs only last 2 years, IBM expert says. Is this true?

[joefree1]

CDs only last 2 years, IBM storage expert says
by Justin Mann on Tue 10 Jan 2006, 06:38 PM

According to Kurt Gerecke, a storage expert and physicist working for IBM in Europe, a standard burned CD you pick up off the shelf is going to last you only two years, five years at the upper end of the spectrum for quality media. The CD supposedly breaks down over time, and anyone looking for a serious backup solution should consider using magnetic tape due to its longer lifespan.

"Unlike pressed original CDs, burned CDs have a relatively short life span of between two to five years, depending on the quality of the CD," Gerecke said in an interview this week. "There are a few things you can do to extend the life of a burned CD, like keeping the disc in a cool, dark space, but not a whole lot more."

While it's true that a standard set of tapes, stored properly, is going to last you a very long time, it's possible there may be something else behind these statements. The dye in CDs does degrade over time, but often I make use of burned CDs that are well over 8 years old, still functioning. The quality of the discs you buy and the method you use to store the discs will impact the life of the CD. He also does mention the use of hard drives as a backup-worthy medium, with bearings wearing out being the primary concern. Then again, if you are using hard drives as a backup solution, the hard drives should be stored in a safe place, not in used, and thus not being worn down. Gerecke's advice seems more applicable to businesses, though, and for just about every desktop user out there, CDs, DVDs and, at most, hard drives, are likely more than enough.

http://www.techspot.com/news/20078-cds-only-last-2-years-ibm-storage-expert-says.html

Is this right? Or does IBM want to sell more Data to tape machines? What about DVDs?

[democracyindanger]

1. There's probably some truth to it

But I regularly use CDs and DVDs that are least two years old. Hell, I've got music CDs that are more than 10 years old.

[hobbit709]

2. sorta true

The cheaper CD-R's are not sometimes sealed perfectly, especially if flexed-this allows air(oxygen specifically) to leak between the layers and degrade the organic dyes. CD-RW's use a metallic layer and last a lot longer. I use RW's for anything critical but I also have most of my data backed up on at least 3 different hard drives too. That reduces chances of failure of all media to a very low probability.

[joefree1]

3. How about DVDs?

I rather burn DVDs then lug around a tape back up system or extra hard drives. I travel internationally for months at a time.

Thanks for the advice.

[hobbit709]

4. Don't know

but since they're made the same way probably the same results.

[RoyGBiv]

5. Be interesting to see the data ...

It's well-known that CD's will degrade over time and are not a permanent solution for data archival, if by that one means archiving to the disc then storing it somewhere permanently. However, the "2 years" notion is far less time than I've ever heard before.

Based on nothing scientific, I simply don't buy it, for the simple reason I have very cheap CD's I burned in '98, and they're still fine. Of course, I store them well, and they have no surface blemishes. Some people -- a lot I am guessing -- got this idea that CD's and DVD's were indestructable, and they don't treat them well. This is the reasons DVD rentals is often such a crap shoot. If you rent a DVD from a store that has that one guy in it who always gets it first, then takes it home and uses his peanut butter encrusted hands to fondle it from all angles, your DVD renting experience is going to suck. (Based on a true story.) I see a lot of CD's people have burned just thrown around on desks or in cars or left in the sun. In those cases, sure, the maximum life expectancy is going to be very low.

I suspect at least part of this "2 year" thing is based on an average, taking into consideration all factors, including the manner in which people treat the media.

[charlie]

6. Agreed

In 8 years I've probably had fewer than a half dozen discs become unreadable. Even the ones from offbrand megapaks have held up fine. I've burned many more than that number of coasters, but once the data's baked in, the failure rate is very very low. Manufacturer's claims of 75-200 years were stupidly optimistic, but an average failure window of 2-5 years doesn't strike me as realistic either. Hasn't been my experience, in any case.

I don't want to cast aspersions on the IBM researcher, who may be honest and diligent with his findings, but I have a niggling suspicion that we'll hear more of this type of scare story as the industry preps us for the Big Migration to Yet Another New Medium.

[RoyGBiv]

7. Good point ...

The Big Migration angle hadn't hit me, but it would fit perfectly with this kind of story, one in which a researcher is quoted without any of the objective data to explain the claim being made. Come to think of it, I read a story on /. recently about the ultimate demise of the CD, and the discussion of it invariably turned on what corporation with what new media format offering in the works was behind the story.

I also don't want to speak negatively of this researcher, who is probably honestly reporting the findings of some sort of study, just as I don't really want to cast aspersion on CERT and the recent "Windows is more secure than other OSes" story. In that case, CERT even said *in the study* that direct comparisons of vulnerability were difficult, in part, because of the reporting process for such things. But, the way the story was presented in the media seemingly intentionally led one to a certain conclusion, one coincidentally backed by the very corporation that would benefit from it.

Anyway, the media format wars are in the process of getting pretty hot, especially in the DVD/HD-DVD arena, but CDs will be a part of it as well. The music industry especially needs to try to get rid of CDs because of the ease with which they are copied.

[charlie]

8. Yep. There's nothing like the go-go hucksterism

of the hi tech carnival show. If your wares aren't up-to-the-minute, you'll be unfashionable today and an orphan on a windblown mountaintop by the end of the month. I was looking at the announcements for the new MacBook Pros... they eat Powerbooks for breakfast and Steve's got the benchmarks and graphs to prove it. 4X the speed!! Whoooo. A few months ago, it was Ignore the Hype, our Photoshop faceoff destroys Intel. Heh. And whenever I see a midline mobo/chipset review, inevitably, invariably, the conclusion is that it's solid for surfing, mailing, word processing... and not much else. Nevermind that its specs exceed the rigs that powered Halo fragfests a couple of years ago...

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

9. I do know that an older generation cd will shatter in a 52x reader

The older cds are more brittle, and at the higher rpms of the modern cd readers they will explode into shards like glass. I've seen it happen more than once.

[Deja Q]

11. Cool!

Love that modern technology. :eyes:

[Deja Q]

10. I've had discs go corrupt after 2 years. I've others 6+ years old and

are still fine.

DVDs use different dyes. But given longevity of dye-based inkjet printers, it's no big shock to know that anything dye-based is going to snuff it far more quickly than advertised.