What's wrong with standalone LTO drives and Hedge Canister

Consider UDFS as Windows can format partitions/disks using the UDF file system but you can only do it via the command line, you can then read and write to it as you would to a normal disk, I believe Linux and Mac's can access it just as easily as long as you don't set the version too high and it is common to all three OS's.

e.g.

FORMAT volume [/FS:file-system] [/V:label] [/Q] [/A:size] [/C] [/X] [/P:passes] [/S:state] /FS:filesystem Specifies the type of the file system (FAT, FAT32, exFAT, NTFS, or UDF).

/R:revision UDF only: Forces the format to a specific UDF version (1.02, 1.50, 2.00, 2.01, 2.50). The default revision is 2.01.

/D UDF 2.50 only: Metadata will be duplicated.

Obviously they must be unaware of the situation here in Australia which I guess will be progressively rolled out around the entire planet. You'll be unable to "physically own" something that's never going to exist in the first instance.

Disney has decided to cease the sale of DVDs and Blu-rays in Australia.

Not sure that the failure rate is all that important anymore because in the first instance most people are running SSD's as their primary drive and secondly who stores bulk data on solitary hard drives?

With easy to use filesystems like ZFS, I store data using Raid-Z (raid 5) or Raid-Z2 (raid 6) which is a bit more expensive, but it means a single hard disk failure is no longer a case of catastrophic data loss.

If you're going to be running a Raid-Z/Z2 stripe in your NAS and you're given a choice of buying hard drives with a 2% AFR or alternatively a different bunch of drives that have a 1% AFR but cost say 10%-20% more then which do you choose? Since you no longer have data loss with a single drive failure so then it's just an economic decision of which is the greater cost of either dealing with extra RMA's vs paying more upfront.