Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!motcid!kraus
From: kraus@motcid (David Kraus)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: RLL ?Reliability?
Message-ID: <4320@grape2.UUCP>
Date: 31 Jul 90 21:59:29 GMT
References: <11971@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Sender: kraus@motcid.UUCP
Distribution: usa
Organization: Motorola Inc. Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Heights, IL
Lines: 27
In-reply-to: ms33@prism.gatech.EDU's message of 30 Jul 90 12:59:25 GMT

In article <11971@hydra.gatech.EDU> ms33@prism.gatech.EDU (Mike Sullivan,  a.k.a. Sully) writes:

   Anyone out there have any advice?  In summary, my questions are:
      1) Reliability of RLL (is it within acceptable limits?)

I've had a Seagate ST238 on my XT clone for about 5 years, and haven't had
any problems with it at all.  Not even any bad sectors cropping up (knock
on wood).

      3) Is this totally transparent to ALL software, or will
	 software designed to low-level format or other hardware
	 specific actions need to know I'm using RLL?

I personally wouldn't use anything that went THAT low-level.  I've had a
copy of Speedstore for about 4 years that's worked with the RLL 238.  It
just cared about capacity (cylinders and sectors/cylinder).  Encoding
format made absolutely no difference.

I'll put it this way:  I liked the RLL ST238 so much that I bought another
one when I was running a BBS.  That drive has seen about 6 months
continuous use, and now whatever use I give my machine (about 2 hours/day).
The only problems I've had running 2 hard drives has to do with heat, and
that's just a mounting issue, soon to be solved.
--
Dave Kraus                                         UUCP: ...!uunet!motcid!kraus
Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Division          FidoNet: 115/777.11
Disclaimer: I didn't say anything.
Quote:  "Dont' turn on the flashing lights.  It's illegal, I think"