Archiving on Mac OS Formatted DVD R Disks

Question

Level 4

2,246 points

Archiving on Mac OS Formatted DVD R Disks

This is a addendum to the thread:

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5435705?answerId=23381660022#23381660022&ac_cid=tw123456#23381660

Summary question: For archiving folders 10s or 100s of GBs large, it is as easy as telling Disk Utility to burn a large folder onto multiple DVD+R disks?

--------- -------- --------- ---------

I have some practical home-archiving questions. This is a scheme that should be easy enough for creating backups that will also serve as medium-term archives. I seek comments on its viability and alternative methods.

I concluded exFAT is a poor filesystem to use for archiving. Mac OS Extended (journaled) is better because it is based in open-source UNIX. It is portable in that it is available in Linux. Who cares if it is not available in Windows? I'm not going to use Windows as part of my archiving scheme. So we get our cake and can eat it too. Agreement?

I want to create some medium-term archives I will keep until the technology for it is waining and I need to transcribe it into the next wave of technology (probably a half to one decade). So for this I am less concerned about open application technologies and I only need media that will last a decade. The 4+GB DVD+R technology is probably the current medium of choice. (Will a modern Superdrive write dual layer DVD+R? I assume not.) I will store the data in the open filesystem and proprietary application formats of the Mac.

This will limit the archive's life, which is OK. When the current applications are no longer supported in a supportable Mac OS version (such as Rosetta-based applications are now) then I would need an old Mac to read this data and that is not a feasible for archiving. I am OK with this because before I reach that state I will have copied my data into future-generation technology and hopefully have read and rewritten it with future-generation open or proprietary applications. That is the only easy methodology I can think of for periodically (one a year) archiving my data.

I will want to create one archive for each for the major data folders: applications, documents, movies, music, pictures, and mail. Each is 10s to 100s of GB large. I simply want to copy each of these folders onto separate DVD volumes. Each DVD disk is limited to 4 or 8 GB so I will need a multi-disk volume for each.

The following thread says if you are burning a folder larger than and individual DVD disk then Disk Utility will automatically allocate the number of physical disks you need. It even has a do-not-split-files option. I also see the Mac OS supports multi-burn sessions on DVD+R disks. All true?

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2793018?start=0&tstart=0

If so it should be easy (but tedious) to burn a 20 GB Applications folder onto five 4.7 GB DVD+R disks. True?

Will Linux be able to read multi-disk Mac filesystem volumes?

Better methods?

I will also want to build a bootable recovery DVD disk to run the current OS on future Macs (if they will support this old OS then). That is a separate topic.

--------- --------- --------- ---------

Summary of questions:

- Are Mac OS X filesystems better than Windows filesystems for archiving

because they are based on open-source UNIX and already work in Linux?

- Do modern Superdrives support dual layer DVD+R (8 GB) disks?

- Will Disk Utility automatically burn a large folder across multiple DVD+R disks?

- Will Linux be able to read these multi-disk Mac filesystem volumes?

- Are there better schemes for burning large folders onto DVDs for medium-term archiving?

- So, for archiving folders 10s or 100s of GBs large,

it is as easy as telling Disk Utility to burn a large folder onto multiple DVD+R disks?

P.S. Extra credit: How would one archive data from a Chromebook?

MacBook Air, OS X Mountain Lion (10.8.5)

Posted on Oct 13, 2013 7:52 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Barney-15E

Level 10

112,914 points

Oct 13, 2013 10:38 AM in response to hands4

I also see the Mac OS supports multi-burn sessions on DVD+R disks. All true?

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2793018?start=0&tstart=0

I don't see anything in that link that reflects multi-session DVDs. The original Mac OS supported multi-session CDs because it became part of the CD specification. However, I don't think it supports Multi-Session DVDs (not spec)--I checked on my system and cannot "leave appendable."

And, I don't imagine Apple has spent any more time on optical disk support since that time as they have relegated optical to the dustbin of history.

I also believe due to the limitations on mulit-session DVD, OS X will only display the first session (maybe last)--one session regardless. I couldn't check this out as I don't have one to check.

Reply

Answer 2

Oct 13, 2013 10:55 AM in response to Barney-15E

Barney-15E Florida

I don't imagine Apple has spent any more time on optical disk support since that time as they have relegated optical to the dustbin of history.

See here:

http://numac.co/blog/

Reply

Answer 3

Barney-15E

Level 10

112,914 points

Oct 13, 2013 10:47 AM in response to PlotinusVeritas

The adverb was relating to the point at which they enabled multi-session CDs. However, I'd agree it is pretty much optional for that statement.

Reply

Answer 4

Oct 13, 2013 10:52 AM in response to Barney-15E

This is currently for sale now

http://numac.co/

Reply

Answer 5

Barney-15E

Level 10

112,914 points

Oct 13, 2013 11:03 AM in response to PlotinusVeritas

So back to the my original point, does it support multi-session BD-R?

Reply

Answer 6

Oct 13, 2013 11:11 AM in response to Barney-15E

I doubt that is the case on multi-session, I thought it was mostly plastic, but its "Machined from a solid aluminum block"

Either way, since it can burn QUAD LAYER DVD blank which are 128GIG Bluray disks...... i dont trust bluray blank media for data archives.

There are no "century disk" Bluray yet.

Such as professional archival DVD blank century-disks rated for 100+ years of validity.

I can imagine a single SPECK of dust covering up 20-30+ MB of data on Bluray. Too spooky to contemplate

Reply

Answer 7

hands4 Author

Level 4

2,246 points

Oct 13, 2013 2:40 PM in response to Barney-15E

Sorry I mixed terminology. I should not have mentioned multiple sessioins. The thread says,

"Not sure if OS X's built in Burn can do it, but Toast Titanium can span disks."

"If the data you choose to burn will take up more than one disk, spanning is automatically chosen and the interface tells you how many disks you'll need. You have the option to "Avoid splitting files when spanning". A good precautionary option if you're worried about an important file not reading back off a disk it has to cross over to. You end up with as many normal disks as it takes. There's no need to read them back in any particular order as long as you don't let it split files."

So if this is true I can write a multi-DVD volume using Toast Titanium. I would prefer to use a standard Mac OS X utility but if this other utility will get the job done I'll use it. I'll burn a separate DVD with the utility on it. I'll put that on a bootable-recovery DVD.

Reply

Answer 8

hands4 Author

Level 4

2,246 points

Oct 13, 2013 3:01 PM in response to PlotinusVeritas

As you are alluding to, my next question is what media to use.

I don't need 100 year durability. If I have not rewritten them by a decade from now using future application upgrades on future OSes, they are likely to be pretty much useless by then. I'll use high-quality DVDs anyway. From your earlier postings I recall you recommend DVD+R disks.

Is single-layer the only ubiquitous format I can use? Will the existing Superdrive I have (circa late 2010) write dual or quad layer? (I assume not.)

I ask partly because, in addition to writing all my personal data in proprietary-application formats, I plan to write important subsets in open formats. These latter archive DVDs would not span disks and should be on a format most any DVD reader will handle.

Reply

Answer 9

hands4 Author

Level 4

2,246 points

Oct 14, 2013 1:53 PM in response to PlotinusVeritas

I agree the extra-dense media is likely to be less reliable. I'm applying that principle even to SL vs. DL disks.

I plan to backup the Applications, Library, Mail, Documents, Pictures, and Music folders onto separate logical volumes on DVD+R (SL) Century Archival Grade Gold or Platinum disks using Toast Titanium to create the multi-disk logical volumes. I'll create an optical recovery disk that includes Toast and CCC.

I'll also archive important files converting them to open formats on and writing them to SL single-disk volumes that will be readable (filesystem and open-application data) on Linux.

DOCX --> RTF

XLSX --> CSV

PPTX --> PDF

Pictures --> JPEG

Music --> None. DRM!

Etc.

To my surprise the DL disks were an order of magnitude cheaper per byte ($8 for 50 Verbatim DL disks vs. $32 for 25 SL-Century disks). However, in the end, this is only a difference of $24 so I chose to use the archival-grade disks.

P.S. I am learning why so few people archive on optical media. It is important but is time consuming. Cloning disks is so much easier.

Reply