I recently got a digital camera with a CF card. It occurs to me that a
CF card could also serve as a backup device if I had a card
reader/writer. It would replace my Sony USB memory stick that I now
use to keep my most important data backed up on.

Anyway, I wonder if a Multimedia Card or a Smart Card would better
serve as a backup/transporter device than a CF card. Of course that
assumes I got an appropriate reader/writer. I think I have seen readers
that will handle all three. An external USB HD is not in the cards (pun
intended) right now.

Any advice or comments on this will be appreciated.

Thank you.

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:02:54 -0500, "Jack Gillis"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I recently got a digital camera with a CF card. It occurs to me that a
>CF card could also serve as a backup device if I had a card
>reader/writer. It would replace my Sony USB memory stick that I now
>use to keep my most important data backed up on.
>
>Anyway, I wonder if a Multimedia Card or a Smart Card would better
>serve as a backup/transporter device than a CF card.

CF is larger but those with metal casing (plate) are also
more rugged. Their pin-connectors are also more reliable.
Their larger size allows greater capacity (but of course at
disproportionately higher prices most often).

Whether this matters in your application/use/transport, I
know not, it would be an individual decision based on your
unique needs. There is no gain in Multimedia card or smart
card though. Multimedia are spec'd to be slower than Secure
Digital (SD), the ideal card for moderate (1GB or less)
that's smaller but more fragile would be Secure Digital.
Add to this that it's price/capacity is good.

Secure Digital (or miniSD for smaller mobile devices) does
seem to the the more popular standard at the moment, such a
card would be more versatile... except that you already have
the CF camera. CF also can be used in ATA mode when
connected to an inexpensive (~$15-30) circuit board,
allowing access as an emulated HDD or even running an
operating system (if one keeps in mind the limited
write-cycles of flash memory, it's not good to use flash for
a swapfile/pagefile or other similar hi frequency write
scenarios). Only CF allows this ATA mode, SD/MMC/etc do
not... though given enough adapters it might be possible.

>Of course that
>assumes I got an appropriate reader/writer. I think I have seen readers
>that will handle all three. An external USB HD is not in the cards (pun
>intended) right now.

yes the typical $15 external or $20 internal USB2 adapters
are easily found. DO get USB2, USB1.1 is far too slow for
modern high capacity flash cards.

If it were me, I'd go with CF since you already have the
camera, unless of course you also have other devices that
take a different flash format. For example an MP3 player
that uses SD, or some newer mobile phones should support
miniSD if they don't already.

"kony" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 11:02:54 -0500, "Jack Gillis"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

snip ----
>
> CF is larger but those with metal casing (plate) are also
> more rugged. Their pin-connectors are also more reliable.
> Their larger size allows greater capacity (but of course at
> disproportionately higher prices most often).
>

Yes, that is very important to me and CF it will be if for no other
reason than that.
Thank you very much.

snip-----