Path: utzoo!censor!hugh From: hugh@censor.UUCP (Hugh D. Gamble) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Seagate ST296N Summary: a little noisy, but no trouble. Message-ID: <803@censor.UUCP> Date: 11 Jul 89 16:17:12 GMT References: <19389@louie.udel.EDU> Organization: Bell Canada, Business Development, Toronto Lines: 39 In article <19389@louie.udel.EDU>, C506634@umcvmb.missouri.edu (Eric Edwards) writes: > What kind of experiences have people had with this drive? I've seen some posts > about having to change the interleave but none about reliablilty. A friend of > mine has found a real good deal on this drive but he is hesitent becuase of > all the horror stories about Seagate drives in general. Is this a 'good' > Seagate or a 'bad' one? Usually I'd send something like this via email, but to counter some of the recent Seagate bashing, here's an unbiased review. I've had a ST296N for almost a year now with nary a problem. It runs 24 hours a day 7 days a week. It only gets power cycled an average of about 2 times a month. It's noisier than a Quantum, but at least it keeps you from hearing the jet engine fan in the 2000 right? Well, actually the drive has a much higher pitched whine so you can still hear both. For people doing a lot of sound stuff or who really care about white noise, a quieter drive could probably be found. It takes up a 5 1/2 " bay & leaves a 3 1/4 " one free. I haven't heard complaints about this particular model (except for lack of speed when the interleave was wrong). I read somewhere that the 296 uses sputtered rather than plated media and that's one reason it doesn't have some of the problems of certain other Seagate models. (No, I'm not going to open it up & check :-) > > Bitnet: C506634@umcvmb.bitnet __________________________ > Internet: C506634@umcvmb.missouri.edu / \.--------. / \ ... -- Hugh D. Gamble (416) 581-4354 (wk), 267-6159 (hm) (Std. Disclaimers) hugh@censor, kink!hugh@censor # It may be true that no man is an island, # but I make a darn good peninsula.