rewriting 1000 files on freq basis , RAM or DVD RW

[faithfoo]

1) I need to rewrite on approx 1000 files on a freq basis ( once in 3 days )
a) I would access the files on a DVD as if it is like a window explorer, drag and drop style when re-writing

2) File size per file is less than 100 Mb , while once a week will rewrite an outlook file that is 1 Gb


** 3) would RAM or DVD R W+ or RW - be more suitable for my needs ..
in terms of less tendency of errors, file corruption ( cost & writing time is not an issue)


4) for DVD RW , can I stick with Verbatim

5) Any comments on the quality of the Verbatim DVD R+/R-specially designated for movies

[hhhhbk]

youd be talking of writing approx 25 dvds every 3 days which would be incredibly time consuming and would take you 6 hours plus

so possibly consider an external harddrive which can be unplugged
allyou need is a hard drive and a usb2/firewire container such as this [i expect you could find them cheaper]
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?AMA-EZD80U
or
http://www.savastore.com/products/product.asp?catalog_name=Savastore&product_id=102718...pid=45&tid=213

[faithfoo]

what I means is I am rewriting all those data every 3 days,

they are actualluy the same files,, just that I am updating them with some changes to the 100 odd files

[indolikaa]

DVD-RAM.

Although hhhhbk's advice is probably a better solution for the data cycles you're discussing. You could use 2 'mirroring' drives and still be way ahead of the money curve in the long run.

[hhhhbk]

" 2 'mirroring' drives and still be way ahead of the money curve in the long run"

do you mean 2 mirroring dvdram drives or just a mirrored internal
hard drive

reason i didnt suggest dvdram is even on 9.4gig cartridges which cost just under 20 quid each you would still need 10 of them and a dvd ram drive so the external hard drive would be cheaper

reason for not suggesting a second internal mirrored hard drive is that if he were to get a virus he could lose all data on both internal hard drives
whereas with an external one the data is safe as it wouldnt be plugged in

[indolikaa]

Two hard drives.


I'll give you somewhat of an example of what I'm thinking of. I have one computer at home that is connected to the Internet, a second computer that is connected via Ehternet to the first, and a third that is physically isolated from the other two. They each have a shuttle bay.

All three are backed up on a removable hard drive. Those drives are archived when needed and stored in a safe place away from the computers. The third computer has a second backup drive, since that's where I do my personal business.

I found shuttling hard drives was faster and less of a hassle than burning DVDs and CDs. I have certain files that change daily, so I decided hard drives were a safer option. When Mt. Rainier DVD+RWs are the norm, I'll probably look at that format. But for now, nothing beats a hard drive for constant archiving.

IMHO.

[RabidDog]

It not like audio CD Vs Data CDr (even though even that is disputable) DVD is digital thruout. However I have read that RAM is better for data and random access, also its archival qualities should be better. Ask me again in 20 years and I can give you a def answer.

RAm uses a combo of two techniques to burn the data (melt & magnetize) rather than one DVDr(melt) or HDD(magnetize).

I hope you're using GFS system?

[MicoMan]

9.4gig cartridges which cost just under 20 quid each

Not any more! £5.89 each!

http://www.blankdiscshop.co.uk/acatalog/FOR_DVD_RAM___CLICK_HERE.html

[hhhhbk]

9.4gig cartridges which cost just under 20 quid each

Not any more! £5.89 each!

http://www.blankdiscshop.co.uk/acatalog/FOR_DVD_RAM___CLICK_HERE.html

still nowhere near as cheap as dvd-r
but far cheaper than on novatech where they were still 20 quid

usb/firewire hard drive must be better if its the best part of 100 gig being rewritten/altered every 3 days

[Hardcoreruss]

Hard drive is the only sensible option in my mind.