Dwight Wallis said:
>the film is simply an insurance policy. I agree that option 2 is the
>cheapest in the short term - I think the jury is still out whether it is
>cheapest in the long term, due to the need for ongoing conversion forever
>(estimated in 10 year cycles).

I think the jury will be out for a long time as to whether maintaining
permanent electronic records is the cheapest alternative.  Too many
variables lie ahead.  Still no industry standard format exists, even though
many of us in the records management community have been pleading for years
to come up with one.  

One other item I'd like to comment on.  I keep on hearing that one of the
knocks on microfilm surrounds environmental and maintenance costs.  These
are just as prevalent with electronic storage as well.  As the storage
capacity of on- and near-line systems increase, so does the cost for
maintaining the environment; these systems put out heat.  What I've noticed
is that storage systems are much more sensitive to heat than microfilm.

Bruce L. White, MBA, CRM, PMP



List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance