On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 22:58:46 +0000, plp@xxxxxxxx wrote:
In message <20020828.185920.524.255998@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> thou hast written:
>>>In a recent Sydney newspaper an article on digital cameras
>>>pointed out that the days of archived family photographs may
>>>well be numbered. With galloping technology it could be too
>>>difficult for the average consumer to keep up with changing
>>>storage methodologies and unless hard copy is made and kept
>>
>>Yes, you must keep up with the times and copy your archives
>>religiously [<- I am not using that word lightly] every time
>>a new [OPEN] standard pops up or a new media takes dominance
>
>You have fallen into the same trap that computer geeks do.
I am a computer geek.
>Those
>geeks assume that, because they understand computers, everyone
>does.
Nope. My 83-year-old Grandmother is using a computer and I know what her
skill level is and how she approaches the durn thing.
>This is simply not true.
No! Really? Well...boy howdy!
>Many people will not keep up
>with technology and will eventually end up with images they cannot
>view. One could assume that businesses might appear to convert
>old image formats into current formats, but eventually even those
>businesses would disappear.
>How many of you now own 8-track tapes
>and the associated equipment to play them?
I'm too young to have purchased an 8-track. It was dead as a doornail by the
time I started buying records. [e.g. the point when mom & dad's record
collections weren't good enough] However, I know a number of places where
I can buy a player, and usually tapes.
I have an LP player and have kept LPs of music that hasn't been release on CD.
I know others with LP players and I know where to buy used ones.
Let's move the analogy back to images, shall we? I can still get
8mm movies converted. I have movies from the fifties picturing my
relatives that I now have on VHS tape. I presume my uncle with the
originals will be cutting DVDs at some point in the future. There
are lots of places to get this done, still.
I can even get old negatives from dead formats printed if I'm willing to pay
for it. Heck, I can even get copies and scans made of the photo of
my Great^Nth Grandmother that was taken when she was a nurse serving the
Union Army.
Moving back to computer technology, I have friends who own 9-track tape
drives -- I converted my big nine-tracks to 8mm over a decade ago so I haven't
had to borrow theirs. The same friends also have TeleTypes and DECTape drives.
I myself have a number of older technologies in store, even though I've
moved all of the "interesting" data forward to modern storage.
As I said, they have to RELIGIOUSLY [cap'ed because you seem to have missed
it the first time around] copy their photos as new media comes into common
use.
The case brought up and waved about is of the BBC's[?] Millenium Domesday Book
which they made ten years ago. Silly gooses failed to move their data forward
[probably because nobody was using it] and realized about a year ago that
their opportunity for reading it off was soon to be lost. It makes for great
press, selling Fear Uncertainty & Doubt.
>What percentage of PC
>users even make regular backups?
1000f those who have lost important (not duplicated elsewhere
that needed to be accessed at a later date) data due to a system
crash.
Amongst Windoze users, that's 99.440f those who have put important
information on their machines and neglected backed it up.
Not only are my photos duplicated on hot storage, I have tape copies
and CD-Rs stored at my house and my father's house.
CD-R media is now so cheap that one could forego a six-pack of pop each month
and copy a lifetime's worth of photos stored digitally.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|