Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:7453 comp.unix.i386:318
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!hellgate.utah.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ginosko!rex!mgse!fleet!mel
From: mel@fleet.UUCP (mel)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Xenix vs. Unix?
Message-ID: <26@fleet.UUCP>
Date: 5 Sep 89 06:35:53 GMT
References: <12@dynasys.UUCP> <14@nstar.UUCP> <1989Sep3.222437.25599@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <34@nstar.UUCP>
Reply-To: mel@.UUCP ()
Organization: Fleet Parts & Equipment, Inc.
Lines: 31

In article <34@nstar.UUCP> larry@nstar.UUCP (Larry Snyder) writes:
>> Xenix also works with nearly everyone's tape drives.  386/ix works with
>> Wangtek only.  I could go on; the hardware support on 386/ix is "somewhat
>> lacking" IMHO.

SCO Xenix isn't all that great at tape drive support either.  Ever since I 
switched to 2.3.1 Xenix it takes TWO attempts at starting the tape drive.
(I'm using an Archive 150 meg/QIC02 internal on my HP Vectra 386/RS20) 
(I also tried an Emerald controller as well as the original Archive unit)

I recently called SCO support after going trough numerous checks of addresses.
interrupts, etc.  Their answer was "O'yeah, we do have a few problems with
some tape drivers.  They're on our 'list', but I'm not sure when (or if)
they're going to fix them".

Great!!  I can't wait to tell my customers about this.  Just start up your
backups twice because the first time there's an allergy between the tape
unit and the CPU so it requires a smooth-out-the-wrinkles false start.  
BTW 'tape reset' hangs the tape drive so completely that the CPU has to be
rebooted.  Would you trust any backups that require this type of maneuvering
to make it go? 

Archive wasn't the only one with problems either.  The rep was hard pressed
to give me an answer on just one "brand" that worked correctly.

Perhaps by letting "you" know what's going on some action will be taken on this.
It seems like having reliable backups should require problems of this nature
to be given the highest priority.

Mel Shear
Fleet Parts & Equipment