Oxford Style Debate – Episode 2: Tape Is Dead. Or Is It? Let’s Debate.

I challenge ​@Michael Melter ;) 

Ha. You did your research well, asking me about tape ​@Madi.Cristil.

(EDIT) I consider myself AGAINST the statement “tape is dead”.😉

(Double negation issue… 😉)

Actually, I tried to convince ​@Anton Gostev in the early days (~2011+) on several events in Germany to integrate tape into VBR. I took me until V7 to see it in the product. 😁

In the following VeeamONs Anton put all advantages into his presentations and celebrated the integration.

I’ll summarize the advantages here:

Security and Ransomware Protection

• True Air Gap: Once a tape is ejected from the drive, it is physically disconnected from any network or host. No malware, ransomware, or compromised admin account can reach or alter the data. Disk repositories (even immutable ones) remain electrically and logically reachable.
• WORM / Strict WORM: LTO WORM media and the Veeam Strict WORM mode prevent any append, overwrite, or deletion at the media level. Disk immutability is software-enforced (e.g., XFS reflink, Hardened Repository, Object Lock) and depends on a healthy OS and clock.
• Offsite portability: Tapes can be transported to a vault (Iron Mountain, bank safe, second site) without bandwidth or replication infrastructure.

Cost and Capacity

• Lower cost per TB: LTO-9 (18 TB native, 45 TB compressed) typically costs a fraction per TB compared to enterprise SAS/SATA disks or SSDs, especially when long retention is required.
• No idle power: Tapes in a slot or vault consume zero watts. Disk arrays draw power and cooling 24/7, even for cold data.
• Scaling by media, not by chassis: Capacity expansion means adding cartridges, not buying additional shelves, controllers, or rebuilding RAID groups.

Longevity and Reliability

• Media lifetime: LTO tapes are specified for 30 years of archival storage under proper conditions. HDDs typically degrade after 5 to 7 years, SSDs suffer from charge loss when powered off for extended periods.
• Bit error rate: LTO-9 has an uncorrected bit error rate of 1 in 10^20, which is 10,000x better than enterprise SAS HDDs (1 in 10^16) and most SSDs.
• No silent corruption from firmware/controller: Tape has no complex RAID controller, cache battery, or firmware logic that can corrupt large datasets at once.

Veeam-Specific Advantages

• GFS Tape Jobs: Native Grandfather-Father-Son retention for long-term archive without inflating the performance tier.
• Tape as a 3-2-1-1-0 component: Tape covers the "1 offline copy" requirement of the 3-2-1-1-0 rule cleanly, which disk-based immutable repos cannot fully satisfy.
• Independent restore path: A tape can be read in any compatible LTO drive worldwide, even without the original Veeam infrastructure (via standalone tools or a fresh VBR install with catalog import).

Regulatory and Audit

• ISO 27001, NIS-2, BSI Grundschutz: Auditors generally accept physically separated tape copies as proof of offline backup. Disk immutability often requires additional documentation of configuration, patch level, and access controls.
• Long retention requirements (e.g., 10+ years for pharma, finance): Tape is the only medium where the TCO remains predictable over such timeframes.

Operational Aspects

• No rebuild times: A failed cartridge affects only that cartridge. A failed disk in a large RAID6/RAID60 set can trigger rebuild times of days with elevated risk of secondary failures.
• Predictable sequential throughput: LTO-9 delivers around 400 MB/s native per drive, which matches or exceeds many SATA HDDs and is ideal for large sequential Veeam backup files.

Limitations to be aware of (for fairness)

• Random access and restore granularity are slower than disk. You often have to stage to disk first.
• Instant Recovery, SureBackup, and Veeam DataLabs require disk, not tape.
• Tape handling requires either an autoloader/library or manual operations.

Honestly speaking, I always size to in a way that you never have to restore from tape under normal circumstances. Tape is merely meant for the “sum of all fears” event. But then, it has your back.

In Germany or even DACH (Germany, Austria, Switzerland), tape is often requested in projects and according to the advantages specified above it is a valid option I always present in strategic discussions.

Even those who dismiss tape as "totally 90s", a relic of a long-gone century, should take note: if you are leveraging AWS Glacier or Azure Archive Tier, you are already using tape backups, hosted at the largest tape operators on this planet. 😎

I challenge ​@benharmer for an idea from the other side (of the planet, maybe not the topic). 

Thank you for such a comprehensive answer, Michael! And yes, I thought I had heard you speak about this topic before 😎

​@Michael Melter 

Cool post, but quick question:

I consider myself FOR.😉

So you argue AGAINST the statement “Tape is Dead”, right? :D Cause you make some compelling points that tape is anything but dead ;)

Good catch, David! :) I think Michael meant I am all in for TAPE :D 

Spot on! 

Yes..good point. I think what Michael meant is he’s FOR TAPE, but Against the “Tape is Dead” argument 😉

Good comment Michael! But….😏

AGAINST the statement — but definitely FOR tape.

I don’t think tape is dead. I think people just forget what problem tape is supposed to solve.

To be honest, in a normal restore scenario, I don’t want to restore from tape. If I need a fast restore, granular recovery, Instant Recovery or SureBackup, I want disk, object storage or a deduplication appliance. That is the right place for operational recovery.

But when everything goes wrong, tape starts to make a lot of sense.

Recently, I worked on a ransomware recovery where tape was not about performance. It was about survival. The environment was compromised, trust was gone, and the fact that the data was on media that could be offline and unreachable made all the difference.

Object Storage with immutability is great. Hardened repositories are great. Dedup appliances are great. I work with these solutions and I like them. But they are still part of an ecosystem: credentials, APIs, clocks, operating systems, lifecycle policies, networks and admins.

And when that ecosystem is compromised or badly configured, “modern” does not automatically mean “safe”.

Also, tape is not standing still. LTO keeps evolving in capacity, performance and features. But tape is not magic either. If the rotation is bad, if the export process is bad, if the media is not cataloged, or if the handling is poor, tape can become just another problem.

I recently shared a case where a data center got flooded, with tapes literally on the floor. A few days later, by coincidence or not, I had to work on a ransomware recovery where what saved the environment was tape. Not those tapes from the floor, thankfully. 😄

That is the funny and scary part about tape: it can save you, but only if the process around it is also good.

So yes, tape has problems:

• It is slower.

• It needs handling.

• It is not great for granular restores.

• It usually requires staging.

• It is not for Instant Recovery or SureBackup.

But it also gives you something very hard to replace: a real offline copy.

For me, tape is not the best restore experience. It is the last line of defense.

I would rather explain to a customer why the restore from tape will take longer than explain why the “modern” archive was also reachable during the attack.

FOR

Is tape dead? Hrmmm.. No, it’s alive and well in certain instances. Tape is shrinking in everyday small business backups; this is true but also growing in capacity at the enterprise archive end. It is most common now in places with petabytes of cold data. Those include media and entertainment, government, healthcare, finance, research (HPC), mainframe shops and regulated archives.

A few reasons that it will continue to remain.

1. Ransomware resilience (offline tape gives you a real air gap offline)
2. Cost per TB
3. Power savings (Usually not thought about a lot but holds true vs spinning rust)
4. Compliance retention (WORM/retention workflows still fit legal, healthcare, finance, public (SLED), and media archives)
5. AI/data lake (AI and analytics are creating large, retained datasets, not all of which belong on spinning rust)

Tape is no longer the default backup medium for normal IT, but it is still relevant for serious archive and cyber recovery architectures. There are of course negatives like random access times etc., but that’s the other side of the argument and I think it still has its place and will continue to do so for a while longer. I was curious so I did a little reading and was able to find stats from a few years ago on LTO. The LTO Program reported 176.5 EB of compressed LTO capacity shipped in 2024, up 15.4% from 2023, so the enterprise archive market is not behaving like tape is dead. We have a lot of tape specifically for Mainframe recoveries and don’t see it going anywhere. 

Absolutely correct, ​@ddomask. Double negation issue. I’m for tape, and therefore against “tape is dead”.

I corrected the post to keep the flow here. 

​@matheusgiovanini , ​@eblack you have to challenge someone from the community 😉

​@kciolek for the challenge! :)

Oh yes, I forgot that, sorry. I’ll challenge ​@coolsport00 . I’d like to see his perspective on this.   

Excelent discussion! ​@Michael Melter brings soooo many interesting topics. No doubt that this post probably will become a safe place to look when anyone will consider tapes on your own backup infrastrcuture in the future.

Nice words from ​@matheusgiovanini too! 

Tks guys!

Very interesting topic and since I was challenge by ​@Jonty in the first round he is the challenge to you bud! You can go first this time.

In this case, I think you are also supporting the motion that “Tape” isn’t dead which leans on the other side “Against “. 

Ohhh...well ok! 😊 Let me give my perspective some thought then I’ll share… 

Sorry, I’ve been in a VxRail workshop last couple of weeks for writing the new exam questions and OOO Friday and Monday.

So, I'm AGAINST it. Tape isn't dead and hear this from many customers I have conversations with, although some are still using it old school for primary storage. However, they are now looking into new solutions that include Veeam. Others, as a archival or air-gap target.

So, the Real Argument should be

Tape isn't dead—it's specialized.

What has declined is the use of tape as a primary backup target for everyday restores (as I said with my customers). Disk, object storage, and cloud are better for fast recovery. However, tape remains highly relevant for:

• Long-term retention
• Compliance archives
• Air-gapped copies
• Large-scale data preservation
• Cost-sensitive cold storage

A good way to frame it is:

"Tape isn't dead. It's no longer the first copy of backup data, but it remains one of the most effective technologies for long-term retention, cyber resilience, and low-cost archival storage."

That's why many modern data protection strategies still follow a variation of the 3-2-1 rule where tape remains a viable offline copy alongside immutable disk and object storage.

I like that: '’Tape isn't dead—it's specialized.'’  good point! 

​@kciolek , please challenge someone in the community ;) 

I’m curious to read your perspective, Shane!

I challenge ​@Chris.Childerhose 

Admittedly, I’m torn LOL. 

AGAINST

Tape is far from dead—it’s just not flashy. In regulated environments (healthcare, legal, government), I’ve seen tape outperform object storage in one key area: true air gap. When ransomware hits and credentials are compromised, your “immutable” object storage can still be targeted via API abuse or misconfig. A tape sitting offline in Iron Mountain doesn’t care about IAM policies. At petabyte scale, tape is still the cheapest long-term retention tier, especially for 7–10 year compliance where object storage egress and lifecycle costs quietly explode. Modern isn’t always safer—it’s just easier to manage.

I now challenge ​@HangTen416 

Talking about ​@HangTen416 , I still recall this show from the two of you, old but gold, if anyone wants to watch it: 

Yes I definitely remember that one.  😂

Oldie but a goodie. 😋