Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!messy!mo From: mo@messy.bellcore.com (Michael O'Dell) Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi Subject: Re: DAT versus 8mm Tape Message-ID: <1990Nov24.032821.24546@bellcore.bellcore.com> Date: 24 Nov 90 03:28:21 GMT References: <272DB1E1.9737@orion.oac.uci.edu> <9850010@hpcpbla.HP.COM> Sender: usenet@bellcore.bellcore.com (Poster of News) Reply-To: mo@messy.UUCP (Michael O'Dell) Distribution: usa Organization: Center for Chaotic Repeatabilty Lines: 17 One thing the 8mm has going for it WRT transport reliability is that a lot of ENG (electronic news gathering) pro video teams are going 8mm as fast as they can, and this means there MUST be fast, reliable 8mm edit suites. This means that a lot of people are beating these things senseless, and these people have a bad attitude about reliability requirements if they are gonna play "bet the station" on the technology. So, while I have NO idea whatsoever that any of this is going to get into the EXABYTE drive, there are real live users with serious reliability demands using 8mm technology. And while you can point to the 2 inch quad machines as living proof that maintenance can triumph over engineering, noone is gonna put up with that in new technology for very long at all. So, the reliability pressure for punishing preroll-stop-roll-preroll-stop-roll applications is very, very real in the 8mm world, and I just don't see those pressures on DAT tapes.... -Mike