Its also a bad mark on the testing applied to office 365. The lack of basic testing from Microsoft in recent years drives me up the effing wall.

What should have happened is they should have tested PowerPoints reaction to saving a file to:

1. Full local storage.
2. Full remote storage.
3. And any other file operation exceptions such as permission errors.

If your hdd had filled up I bed PowerPoint would have had something to say. It probably has no idea that the cloud storage was full, because someone didn't test for that and highlight that the cloud storage back end (onedrive) was probably never given such functionality.

As a former software tester I would have not signed off PowerPoint nor onedrive until such a quality assurance UX flaw had been addressed. That's what I used to do, I certainly affected the design of the software as I found the design flawed many times, not just unable to handle an error but also to have the wrong or non existent feedback to users.

When I worked in a company that used 365 (dont any more thankfully) onedrive was a pain in the effing IT support buttocks. It was constantly getting "stuck", constantly and silently failing to sync conflicting files, its UI lacked the basic usability features needed to let the user detect this and deal with it without me getting involved.

No

But storage is technically memory.

When I get around to it I will have certain images printed out properly on optical paper.

This is the same technology used to make prints from negatives, the paper can be exposed to the negative or a digital image can be printed to it using a laser.

Fuji and Ilford offer it as archival type of printing. I'm sure many others do.

People wanting to print at home using inkjet can use archival paper and inks but I gave up inkjet years ago because unless you actually print then it just dries up.

I have a colour laser instead but I'd not consider that photo quality.

If you want the best archival quality look for companies that use Fuji's Crystal Archive paper. Same kind of stuff used with negatives thus same multi-decade stability.

r/analogcommunity is a good place to start

They might talk about DSLR scanning but unless you have such a camera and are interested in trying it you are best just sticking to a photo scanner plus software that will scan multiple slides at once.

They will probably recommend an Epson scanner but Canon make them also.

The software usually is supplied with the scanner and usually will scan several slides or negatives at once.

Because you have so many to scan you dont need to scan at too great a detail. The resolution of scanners are usually hyped up on the packaging, if you scan at a lower resolution to speed up scanning.

Prints can be scanned at 600 or 1200dpi as they are already quite large. Negatives and slides can be scanned at 2400 or 4800dpi, which will give decent speed plus a finer detail to allow them to be enlarged.

Over 4800dpi is not usually worth it as the hardware resolution of the scanner usually tops out at 4800 or 9600dpi.

You've changed the sata cables and tried a different port yes?

Oh yes well that's just because of the poor master. Time Bandits was like that for years till it was properly done with the latest remaster. The same was true for The Faith Element.

Well if you think you can adjust the tint then you should easily be able to rip the disc, depending on how new it is.

I use MakeMKV myself.

I wouldn't want to load, click, wait, unload 800 DVDs

To me seems easier than sit, browse, search, get coffee, search again, download magnet link, open, watch, watch, Christ why are there no seeders, delete, browse, search, download link again, watch, yay seeders, get more coffee, watch, huh why have I only got 80%, crap, everyone only has a max of 80%, why didn't I notice that, go to bed.

And if you are in the UK like me:

Browse, find torrent, view blocked page... (Torrents in the UK are effectively dead, nobody does it).

Scan the doc

Meh, I have a sheet feeder for that sort of reason. You could always just take a photo of them. Much quicker if you are rushing.

play around with OCR

Don't bother. Tick the OCR box and just let it be.

My solution (and I actually am doing this sort of thing): Copy the loose video files off each disc, burn to fewer Blu-rays. Oh and I never made printed indexes, that was a waste of ink. Text files and grep. Nothing more.

my old computer no longer has a working DVD player, so I wouldn't know how to read the contents.

Go onto Amazon and buy a new drive, they are dirt cheap. Heck you could get a usb-c one for future proofing.

Then you can either keep the discs or just copy everything off. Saves all that tedious faffing about with endless searching, downloading, indexing. Unless you enjoy that, which I don't, you'll get bored out of your skull and give it up for a while to play Hogwarts Legacy or something, then come back a year later to continue only to find the law got involved and killed the trackers you were relying on and you also have no idea where you got to anyway.

I'd just spend pocket money on a drive ;)

From reading the other comments it seems all discs are like this?

In that case your problem is the calibration of your input and display device.

You can get calibration discs that will let you adjust levels in a guided way.

Or just adjust the green amount.

Disc rot is exceedingly rare. Maybe you will find one or two in a box of a thousand perhaps.

What is very likely is they never finalised the discs. They will/may be able to be finalised in a dvd recorder.

Without finalisation there is no valid filesystem thus they appear blank.

When I get home I'll give this a go, I usually use RW discs in my recorder, which ensures I dont need to finalise.

2 years is long term?

Wow now I feel old, at my age 2 years feels like what 6 months used to be lol.

Amazon Glacier Deep Archive