Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!unido!fauern!tumuc!lan!charly.bl.physik.tu-muenchen.de!k2
From: k2@charly.bl.physik.tu-muenchen.de (Klaus Steinberger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec
Subject: Re: Exabyte (8mm) versus DAT (4mm) (Summary)
Message-ID: <3374@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de>
Date: 12 Jul 90 12:04:08 GMT
References: <9007061713.AA01816@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> <1881@proa.SV.DG.COM> <13113@cbmvax.commodore.com> <14385@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de
Lines: 35

wilson@csli.Stanford.EDU (Nathan Wilson) writes:


>1) Many more people have Exabyte than DAT.  I did not get a
>single response from someone who actually uses a DAT drive.

We use a DAT since 4 weeks for backup, and we want to buy more drives
also for our data-acquisition.

>3) DAT drives have very fast seek times, but who cares for backups.

We will use it also for data-acquisition, and we care for the seek time.

>4) Exabyte distributors tend to market for only one brand of computer.
>Some of the DAT drives that I've gotten info on work with a truckload
>of different computers, Suns, DEC, HP, IBM, Apple.  As far as I can
>tell this is another uninteresting difference since neither of them
>should get moved around a lot.

We have a park of hardware, or will get it, so its interesting.
If one drive fails, we can exchange it !

>5) Exabyte hardware tends to break a fair amount, but at least
>they tell you there is a problem.  From the responses:

>6) Nobody's saying (knows?) anything about the reliability of DAT
>hardware.

No experience yet, we have it since 4 weeks just now.

Sincerely,
Klaus Steinberger
Klaus Steinberger               Beschleunigerlabor der TU und LMU Muenchen
Phone: (+49 89)3209 4287        Hochschulgelaende, D-8046 Garching, West Germany
BITNET:  K2@DGABLG5P            Internet: k2@charly.bl.physik.tu-muenchen.de