Re: 891711/MS05-002 Updated (fixed) for Win9x. Looking for Win XP Pro 64?

From: Rick Chauvin (
Date: 04/14/05

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:34:37 -0400

Bill in Co. wrote:
> When I make a HD backup (in one burn), I can fit just about everything I
> really need on ONE dvd. So there is no comparison (for what I'm trying
> to do)/ No way am I gonna use 6 or 7 CDs in its place, regardless of the
> cost!

The point of what I read that Gary or AlmostBob are saying, and is true, that
using a spare HD is ultimately by far superior for dozens of reasons, by far,
and is cheaper on top of it. It's a no-brainer decision, and once you
actually use that method - you will never ever look back. CD media has it's
place yes, but for this conversation with daily or weekly backups - a spare
HD is totally ultimate in every way better.


> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> Cost-wise, I can't imagine that DVDs are much different from CDs except
>> for convenience.I use DVDs (I forget which format) for permanent storage
>> of projects (or copies of other DVDs.) But for re-writable, daily
>> backups, I use a pair of external HDs (swapping them regularly.)
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS MVP Shell/User
>> "Bill in Co." <> wrote in message
>> news:O$c7x6QQFHA.3496@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>> I don't like UDF, either, in any flavor. And perhaps it's that issue
>>>> which colors my thinking, here. Using standard formatting, what do you
>>>> think the life expectancy for CDRWs is?
>>>> Regardless, I agree with AlmostBob--a spare hard drive, particularly an
>>>> external HD if your system supports USB2 or Firewire, is a much more
>>>> sane and economical solution for regularly backing up large amounts of
>>>> data.
>>> Or burn your important stuff to a DVD.
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS MVP Shell/User
>>>> "John Corliss" <jcorliss@fake.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:e0uBhHNQFHA.2356@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>>>> Ah, I see.
>>>>>> I've never understood the attraction of CDRWs. It's not like they're
>>>>>> endlessly reusable, and they are probably even *more* prone to getting
>>>>>> screwed up than CDRs.
>>>>> My experience was that when I formatted CDRWs for drag and drop (UDF) I
>>>>> had nothing but problems. About 60% of the time, the format process
>>>>> failed. Of those I successfully formatted, about 50% of them wouldn't
>>>>> take data successfully. Of those that I successfully put data on, about
>>>>> 50% of THOSE were unreadable. Of those that were readable, about 50%
>>>>> failed at a later date.
>>>>> However, when I use a CDRW like a CDR (ISO9600 or Joliet), they are
>>>>> very reliable, and can easily be erased and reused. That way, I don't
>>>>> have a pile of CDs building up because "it might have something I need
>>>>> on it". Kinda "self psych 101".
>>>>> YMMV
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards from John Corliss

Relevant Pages