Xref: utzoo comp.sys.att:10555 unix-pc.general:6200
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!timbuk!cs.umn.edu!sialis!rjg
From: rjg@sialis.mn.org (Robert J. Granvin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att,unix-pc.general
Subject: Re: My 3B1 FIXDISK 2.0 experience (so far, LONG)
Message-ID: <123@sialis.mn.org>
Date: 8 Oct 90 14:09:29 GMT
References: <261@ramecs.UUCP>
Organization: Dr. Ho Laboratory and Daycare Center
Lines: 30

In article <261@ramecs.UUCP> car@ramecs.UUCP (Chris Rende) writes:
>By the way, these disks seem pretty cheap: they don't even have hub rings!
>
> [...]
>
>The second set arrived a few days later. Again no hub rings.

Unrelated to the post in general, I'd just like to point out that lack
of hub rings does not indicate the comparable value or reliability of
a diskette.

All diskettes meet minimum specifications, and AT&T does not use disks
that don't meet them.  These standards in certain areas can seem to be
pretty lax, but in the important areas, they're very specific, and
tend to (normally) be much higher than would be necessary.  Unfortunately,
this doesn't guarantee a 100% success rate.

Also, certain types of diskettes simply don't come with hub rings.  High
density disks for PC/AT's, for example, almost always come without hub
rings.  There are other types of diskettes for other applications or
systems that also come without hub rings.  In those cases, adding hub
rings may increase your conscious trust of the diskette, but it doesn't
really aid the diskette.  The disk is no worse than others because it
lacks one.

-- 
Robert J. Granvin \\\\\\\\                         rjg@sialis.mn.org : INTERNET
University of Minnesota \\\              ...uunet!rosevax!sialis!rjg : UUCP
School of Statistics \\\\\\\            rjg%sialis.mn.org@nic.mr.net : BITNET
              "Make sure your dreams last longer than the night."