How good/bad would it be to have a poor man's tape archival, using standard cassette tapes (C90, C120, etc)?
For example, using something like ggwave [1]. I guess that would last way more than 5 years (although the data density is rather poor).
For example, using something like ggwave [1]. I guess that would last way more than 5 years (although the data density is rather poor).
"Rather poor" is putting it mildly. This sent me down a sort rabbit hole. From a Stack Exchange discussion[0] it was a short trip to exceedingly technical discussion about using QAM encoding[1] to really beef-up the storage capability.
With the wacky QAM encoding tt looks like maybe 20MB per C90 cassette (and 90 minutes to "read" it back).
[0] https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/9260/how-...
I would be careful with that, however. If you are archiving your data, it's because you like it and, if you like your data, you want it to be readable a long time from now. I'd suggest vinyl records rather than tapes, as they are very robust, and can be read without physical contact.
A LTO8 tape stores 12,000,000 megabytes.
Part of that may be the tape drive (about 40 years old) but the reality is that consumer level cassette tapes aren't built to last: magnetic fields weaken, coating flakes off, tape stretches, and other factors prevent these from being storage solutions beyond 10-20 years (my guess), if that.
They might be a fun nostalgic diversion for listening to old music, where the audio degradation is part of the experience, but for data, they're a non-starter in my book.