Is there something better for long term storage of family photos and other important data?
Of course there's still a chance that physical prints can be lost, stolen or destroyed in a house fire. But I think overall that's statistically much less likely to happen than digital media becoming obsolete or unreadable, or data stored online being deleted because the original uploader stopped paying the storage bill or didn't arrange for transfer of their accounts after their death.
In all seriousness, this isn't a popular opinion around here, but cloud storage. I back my photos up to both iCloud and OneDrive. This way there is triple redundancy if you include the local copy. I trust Apple and Microsoft a lot more than myself to protect my data from spilled beverages, floods, fires, other acts of god, or just my own stupidity in general.
So far, cutting edge commercial is https://www.piql.com/, the Norwegian company that did the GitHub Arctic code vault. Their tapes have instructions on how to decode the data inscribed on the tape itself.
Truly cutting edge (non-commercial) is Microsoft’s Project Silica optical storage as well as DNA storage.
I’ve been thinking about building something in this space since I started my career, but the business seems incredibly hard to figure out a revenue model for. Trying to have someone pay up front for eternity(?), always seemed like a steep price. Would love to hear others thoughts if they’ve talked to people about this.
CD-R because it is still around after more than two decades and the media is still in production, there are many drives and they are repairable.
My second choice would be DVD-R for similar reasons, but less history.
Third choice would be FAT formatted spinning disks used as write once. But they are much more susceptible to environmental flux.
Anything that is expensive or hard to come by or new, I would avoid…they’re almost certainly going to be a Zip drive equivalent in 20 years because there is no consumer demand for physical storage and less and less commercial demand because of the cloud.
But that’s me so YMMV. Good luck.
It was a massive effort. So, I no longer do that.
I now just keep everything on my NAS. The volumes are mirrored. I have a removable HDD onto which I snapshot the entire NAS volume every night. I swap that drive out every month and send it off-site (and replace it with the one previously off-site). So I have live, local snapshot (up to 24 hours out-of-date), and off-site snapshot (up to 1 month out of date).
Everything I care about is rsync-ed daily to the NAS: home directories, photos, music, Time Machine laptop backups, machine configs, IMAP sync, CalDAV sync, CardDAV, Git repo clones, etc.
Every few years, I double the size of the NAS volume.
There's no monthly cost, and there's no concern about degradation of the media. The storage format is always current, as are the OS and tools required to read it. The only effort is the monthly off-site drive swap.
It won't outlive me, unless my heirs decide to continue to maintain it, but ... at that point I no longer care.
I’ve been thinking of this question too, and think a combination of cloud storage (GDrive + iCloud), HDs, and these MDiscs is what I’ll do. Just haven’t bought the MDrive writer yet.
RClone takes care of uploading to it. Works out to barely over $1/TB/month and AWS takes care of the media lifetime and all that.
I didn't bother with burned disks because then the backups are too local to me, nevermind spanking TBs across multiple disks.
It really depends on your requirements.