Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!sigma
From: sigma@pawl.rpi.edu (Kevin J Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 65 MB RLL Drive Recommendations
Message-ID: <%K8=R=@rpi.edu>
Date: 12 Feb 90 05:36:08 GMT
References: <5409@gremlin.nrtc.northrop.com> <538@esfenn.UUCP>
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 23

In article <538@esfenn.UUCP> davee@.UUCP (Dave Edick) writes:
>I'd definitely recommend the Toshiba over the Seagate.  The Seagates are
>quite suspectable to stiction (heads getting stuck to the platters).  The
>Toshibas do not appear to have this problem, plus they're faster, quieter,
>put out less heat, and smaller.  Need I go on?  There is a down side to the
>Toshiba.  It costs a little more.  Seagates are virtually always the cheapest
>bet in town, but you pay for it by getting a less reliable drive.

I'd be the first to agree with this assertion for the earlier RLL drives
from Seagate, most notably the ST-238R (some might not even have the R),
but I beg to differ with reference to the 277.  This is a fast and very
reliable drive - I've been using it for seven months now (heavily), and
never had a misread, bad sector, crash, or any problems I frequently
have with the second hard drive, an old junky 238.  Don't judge all
models by one or two older ones.

On the other hand, it's true that I have no experience with Toshiba
drives, and they may well be fantastic as well.  Seagate bundles Disk
Manager and a manual listing all their drives' parameters, but I don't
know one way or the other about Toshiba.

Kevin Martin
sigma@pawl.rpi.edu