Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/13/84; site intelca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!decwrl!sun!idi!intelca!cem
From: cem@intelca.UUCP (Chuck McManis)
Newsgroups: net.micro.cpm
Subject: Re: Re: S-100 disk system upgrades - info request
Message-ID: <544@intelca.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 25-Mar-85 14:41:16 EST
Article-I.D.: intelca.544
Posted: Mon Mar 25 14:41:16 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Mar-85 01:24:51 EST
References: <9166@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: Intel, Santa Clara, Ca.
Lines: 25

> 
> Well, I haven't messed with the System 3 that we had at my old
> job, but it seems to me that we had nothing but troubles with both
> the Persci 277 and 299 drives. They were constantly gouging diskettes.
> In addition, both the 4FDC and 16FDC controllers we had were constantly
> sent in for repair. I would stay away from any of these items.
> 
> John Hight
> SRI International	(john@sri-tsc)

I have used a system III with a 16FDC and a persci 299b rather extensively 
for nearly a year, and in the process developed a cp/m bios for it that
put both the drive and the controller though heavy use and have never even
had a Read or Write error trap. (Which means no error that wasn't recovered
in the 5 retries that the BIOS allows for). As above it is only one persons
experience but I have been quite pleased.

--Chuck


-- 
                                            - - - D I S C L A I M E R - - - 
{ihnp4,fortune}!dual\                     All opinions expressed herein are my
        {qantel,idi}-> !intelca!cem       own and not those of my employer, my
 {ucbvax,hao}!hplabs/                     friends, or my avocado plant. :-}