Xref: utzoo comp.sys.dec:3552 comp.misc:9453
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!xanth!mcnc!decvax.dec.com!abyss.zk3.dec.com!tarsa
From: tarsa@abyss.zk3.dec.com (Greg Tarsa)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.misc
Subject: Re: Exabyte (8mm) versus DAT (4mm)
Message-ID: <126@decvax.decvax.dec.com.UUCP>
Date: 9 Jul 90 15:48:58 GMT
References: <9007061713.AA01816@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> <1881@proa.SV.DG.COM> <13113@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Sender: news@decvax.dec.com.UUCP
Reply-To: tarsa@abyss.zk3.dec.com (Greg Tarsa)
Followup-To: comp.sys.dec
Lines: 33

In article <13113@cbmvax.commodore.com>, grr@cbmvax.commodore.com
(George Robbins) writes:

|> 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.
|> 

I remember seeing, some months ago, a press release from Exabyte (I'm
on their mailing list) clarifying this issue.

The *tape transport* is 8mm format, the electronics are Exabyte's own.
I believe if you check (call Exabyte), you will find that 8mm tape
drives are written in a digital format, not some analog adaptation.

The issue of "DAT is digital, 8mm is analog" is a non-issue, probably
concocted by DAT marketing to confuse things.

If DAT is superior to 8mm, it is not because of the format.

Greg
Tarsa Software Consulting
--------------------------------
		33 Seabee Street
		Bedford, NH 03102	tarsa@elijah.mv.com
		(603)668-9226		{decuac,decvax}!elijah!tarsa