Xref: utzoo comp.sys.dec:3543 comp.misc:9440
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucsd!rutgers!cbmvax!grr
From: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.misc
Subject: Re: Exabyte (8mm) versus DAT (4mm)
Message-ID: <13113@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 9 Aug 90 04:32:06 GMT
References: <9007061713.AA01816@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> <1881@proa.SV.DG.COM>
Reply-To: grr@cbmvax (George Robbins)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 25

In article <1881@proa.SV.DG.COM> gary@proa.SV.DG.COM () writes:
> In article <9007061713.AA01816@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> de5@ornl.gov (Dave Sill) writes:
> >DEC seems to be pushing DAT's, and argues that they're inherently
> >better since they were designed to record digital data, whereas 8mm is
> >an analog video format.
> 
> Why wasn't this sent to rec.humor.funny?  This is the funniest thing I've
> seen on the net this year.  Did someone actually say that?

> Digital Audio Tape was designed to record SOUND.

Yes, *digitized* sound, whereas 8-MM is designed to record analog video.

The differences between the electronics of a transport designed to record
in a saturated digital mode vs a fairly linear analog mode may be significant.

In a low speed drive, this is certainly true, while in a high performance
drive, it all looks analog anyway, but the closer you put the 1/0 decisions
to the drive, the better, assuming you really plan to transcribe digital
data.

-- 
George Robbins - now working for,     uucp:   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr
but no way officially representing:   domain: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com
Commodore, Engineering Department     phone:  215-431-9349 (only by moonlite)