Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!canisius!pavlov
From: pavlov@canisius.UUCP (Greg Pavlov)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: DAT versus 8mm Tape
Message-ID: <3007@canisius.UUCP>
Date: 15 Nov 90 02:54:19 GMT
References: <272DB1E1.9737@orion.oac.uci.edu> <9850005@hpcpbla.HP.COM>
Organization: Canisius College, Buffalo N.Y. 14208
Lines: 29

In article <9850005@hpcpbla.HP.COM>, peterk@hpcpbla.HP.COM (Peter King) writes:
> 
>                  A Few Thoughts On Your DAT vs 8mm Choice
>                 ========================================
> 
> * There are also hundreds of different DAT solutions. DAT is supported on
>   systems from HP and DEC - 
> 
  Note that DEC announced a DAT drive (manufactured by HP ?) many months ago
  but has never shipped.  It has been selling 8mm drives as a substitute.

  In all of the "pros and cons" articles that I have seen "comparing" 4mm DAT
  to 8mm, there is very little to differentiate the two in terms of the prim-
  ary application of the devices, which is backup.  

  Since most of the arguments appear to be put forth either by manufacturers/
  resellers of the devices or in a few cases are simply rumor-mongering (the
  "analog" vs "digital" disinformation being the primary example), I have to
  throw in my own unsubstantiated prejudice:  it is true that both technologies
  will permit very considerable storage per unit (e.g., a cartridge).  But I
  have to be concerned with long-term storage as well as short-term backups.
  I have some doubt about the long-term viability of the data stored on either
  of these formats.  But since I do, I would rather bet on the lower density
  of the 8mm medium, when considering two units of the same capacity.

   greg pavlov, fstrf, amherst, ny
   pavlov@stewart.fstrf.org