Like your USB flash drive?

[John Doe]

Anybody have a flash drive and don't like them? Somehow I doubt it.

I just received another, going from 256 MB to 1 GB (much faster, and
cheaper than the 256). I'm giddy. Yes there are larger sizes, but I
like to buy at the price/performance point.

Looks like the old annual prediction about DVD replacing CD is going
to become obsolete itself, at least for me since I don't copy CDs
and DVDs. Flash drive backup is the way to go.

Copying a 670 MB file to the flash drive takes 55 seconds here.
Copying that back to the hard drive takes 36 seconds here.

Someone wrote that a flash drive can be formatted to NTFS with
Microsoft's CONVERT.EXE. Then it can be encrypted. So if I take a
drive with me (not for transferring files but as simple off-site
data protection) and accidentally lose it, apparently no one will be
able to read it. I guess that still maintains plug and play
functionality. Is there any known risk to using CONVERT.EXE to
convert a flash drive to NTFS? Thank you.

Have fun.

 

[John Doe]

Someone wrote that a flash drive can be formatted to NTFS with
Microsoft's CONVERT.EXE.

I subsequently asked about that in a Windows XP group.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Looks like the old annual prediction about DVD replacing CD is going
to become obsolete itself, at least for me since I don't copy CDs
and DVDs. Flash drive backup is the way to go.

DVDs have a higher capacity than USB flash drives, although that could
change (then again, DVDs are changing, too).

I'm not sure that DVD or flash are sufficiently archival. I'm not
even that confident about CDs. Magnetic tape works very well, but
it's much more expensive. Current tapes can hold up to 8 terabytes.

 

[John Doe]

DVDs have a higher capacity than USB flash drives, although that
could change (then again, DVDs are changing, too).

Do you own a flash drive?

 

[Mxsmanic]

Do you own a flash drive?

Yes.

 

[Phisherman]

I have a flash drive and use it when traveling, but I still use
magnetic tapes for backups. Today, it is difficult to beat the
capacity of a magnetic tape!

 

[Clint]

I own both USB flash drives, as well as multiple DVD and CD burners. IMHO,
they're not comparable. Flash drives are like super-dooper floppy drives
(read-write, smaller capacities), and CD/DVD burners are more for
archival/longer term storage. The reason for this is the cost per megabyte
of long term storage. Once your flash drive is full, you either have to
remove stuff off of it (if you want to store more), or buy another drive (at
what, $40 or $50/GB?). With a DVD burner, when you need more storage, you
buy another disk at what, $0.50 for 4GB.

Clint

 

[John Doe]

Yes.

What make and model?

 

[John Doe]

I own both USB flash drives, as well as multiple DVD and CD
burners. IMHO, they're not comparable.

For me, they are functionally almost identical and a major upgrade.

Flash drives are like super-dooper floppy drives
(read-write, smaller capacities),

Flash drive capacity is increasing rapidly and already nearly the
capacity of DVDs. And they are much easier to use.

and CD/DVD burners are more for
archival/longer term storage. The reason for this is the cost per
megabyte of long term storage. Once your flash drive is full, you
either have to remove stuff off of it (if you want to store more),
or buy another drive (at what, $40 or $50/GB?). With a DVD
burner, when you need more storage, you buy another disk at what,
$0.50 for 4GB.

Of course that's a major feature of CDs/DVDs over flash drives, at
least currently, if you need it. Out of curiosity, what
gigabytes/terabytes do you archive?

 

[Sts4Heffer]

What make and model?

hang on in there, he's counting...............

 

[Mxsmanic]

What make and model?

A SanDisk Cruzer of 1 GB capacity. I use it to move data between
machines when there is no high-speed network access handy.

 

[Mxsmanic]

For me, they are functionally almost identical and a major upgrade.

Standard DVDs hold about 4.5 GB and cost almost nothing. Future DVDs
will hold much more and cost about the same.

It is a general rule in IT that active memory technologies (such as
flash or ordinary RAM) always cost more than passive technologies such
as magnetic recording (tape and disk) or optical recording (CD and
DVD). This rule has held for a very long time.

Flash drive capacity is increasing rapidly and already nearly the
capacity of DVDs. And they are much easier to use.

They are horribly expensive, too.

Of course that's a major feature of CDs/DVDs over flash drives, at
least currently, if you need it. Out of curiosity, what
gigabytes/terabytes do you archive?

I have about 140 GB archived, and about 600 GB that I back up on a
short term basis. I suppose I could do all that on flash drives for
about ... $44,000.

 

[Terry]

Someone wrote that a flash drive can be formatted to NTFS with
Microsoft's CONVERT.EXE. Then it can be encrypted. So if I take a
drive with me (not for transferring files but as simple off-site
data protection) and accidentally lose it, apparently no one will be
able to read it. I guess that still maintains plug and play
functionality. Is there any known risk to using CONVERT.EXE to
convert a flash drive to NTFS? Thank you.

I think that once you've encrypted the drive, you can only use it on
that particular combination of computer/windows/user. So it's no good
as backup if the computer dies and you need to get the data off the
flash drive on another computer.

If you want encrypted backup, I suggest using TrueCrypt to created an
encrypted container drive on the flash drive.

http://www.truecrypt.org/

Terry

 

[Clint]

Well, we do a lot of work with customer databases. Zipped up, they're
anywhere from 1 to 10GB in size. Am I going to buy a new flash disk for
each one of them I want to archive? And when I ask them for a copy, are
they going to send me their data on a flash disk? I doubt it.

I agree flash disks are easy to use (no software to install, no special
hardware besides USB required). Again, that makes them more like the
floppies of old rather than the CD burners that have been around for years.

Clint

 

[John Doe]

Standard DVDs hold about 4.5 GB and cost almost nothing. Future
DVDs will hold much more and cost about the same.

Yes of course future everything will be much bigger and faster.

The local Target store still has 16 MB USB flash drives next to 1 GB
flash drives on their shelves.

It is a general rule in IT that active memory technologies (such
as flash or ordinary RAM) always cost more than passive
technologies such as magnetic recording (tape and disk) or optical
recording (CD and DVD). This rule has held for a very long time.

So the apparent fact that USB flash drive capacity is rapidly
increasing is just a figment of my imagination?

They are horribly expensive, too.

Of course that depends on the application.

I have about 140 GB archived, and about 600 GB that I back up on a
short term basis.

Are you playing dumb? The question (Clint already answered) was what
sort of data, not how much.

I agree that USB flash drives resemble floppy drives. But for those
of us who don't burn or copy CDs/DVDs, flash drives will make CD/DVD
burners obsolete. Most users are still struggling with the process
of copying files to a CD, it's a hassle. And if I wanted to store
hundreds of gigabytes worth of downloaded multimedia/programs, I
would use a hard drive (or whatever, other than a DVD).

No more messing with DVD burners for me.

I suppose I could do all that on flash drives for about ...
$44,000.

I wish I were your supplier. I just bought another 1 GB flash drive
for $20 (a PNY, not nearly as fast as my Corsair).

 

[John Doe]

I think that once you've encrypted the drive, you can only use it
on that particular combination of computer/windows/user. So it's
no good as backup if the computer dies and you need to get the
data off the flash drive on another computer.

And if the hard drive fails, it's impossible to recover the NTFS
encrypted data stored on the flash drive?

I'm getting no response from the Windows XP help group. I suspect
the answer is negative.

Thanks.

 

[John Doe]

drive (at what, $40 or $50/GB?).

You blinked.

Take a look on NewEgg.

Two GB flash drives are selling for about $50 total.

I would have bought the 2 GB Corsair but I wanted the faster write
speed of the 1 GB.

 

[Mxsmanic]

So the apparent fact that USB flash drive capacity is rapidly
increasing is just a figment of my imagination?

No, but passive storage systems are increasing in capacity much more
quickly.

Of course that depends on the application.

The applications in this case are backups and archives. Flash memory
isn't cost-effective for these applications.

I agree that USB flash drives resemble floppy drives. But for those
of us who don't burn or copy CDs/DVDs, flash drives will make CD/DVD
burners obsolete.

If you don't burn CDs or DVDs, how do you keep long-term archives and
backups?

Most users are still struggling with the process
of copying files to a CD, it's a hassle. And if I wanted to store
hundreds of gigabytes worth of downloaded multimedia/programs, I
would use a hard drive (or whatever, other than a DVD).

Tape is easier.

 

[John Doe]

No, but passive storage systems are increasing in capacity much
more quickly.

Is that the view from France? That's nonsense.

The applications in this case are backups and archives. Flash
memory isn't cost-effective for these applications.

If your time isn't worth anything, maybe.

If you don't burn CDs or DVDs, how do you keep long-term archives
and backups?

Backups currently on USB flash drives. Are you deaf?

The average personal computer user doesn't need gigabytes of
long-term archives. The average personal computer user probably
doesn't do backups at all, partly because burning CDs/DVDs is too
much trouble.

Tape is easier.

Easier than a hard drive?

What is your problem?

 

[Clint]

Actually, it's not so much that I blinked, it's more because I live in
Canada. Even with the current exchange rate, we're still screwed. And
NewEgg won't ship up here, so I don't spend much time watching their prices.
BUt it's good to see the prices are dropping steadily still.

Clint