Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!bbn.com!drilex!dricejb
From: dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: Exabyte (8mm) versus DAT (4mm)
Message-ID: <13467@drilex.UUCP>
Date: 11 Jul 90 22:42:18 GMT
References: <9007061713.AA01816@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> <1881@proa.SV.DG.COM> <1151@tardis.Tymnet.COM>
Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA
Lines: 13

About all of this arguing about 'digital' DAT vs 'analog' 8mm video tape:

To the best of my knowledge, *all* video tape (quad scan, various old
helicals, VHS, 8mm) uses FM to encode the video signal.  What this means
is that no information is carried in the amplitude of the signal, and
all of the magnitization is fully saturated.  This isn't actually digital
recording, but it's a lot closer than most people seem to think.  (Note that
many 'digital' recording systems use some form of FM to actually record
the information.)
-- 
Craig Jackson
dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com
{bbn,axiom,redsox,atexnet,ka3ovk}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}