>
> In other words, if your tape has hardware compression, you may be out
> of luck without the exact drive that wrote it.
>
So far, we're able to read DDS3 tapes from a Sony drive where
we used hardware compression in a Sony DDS4 drive, so at least
Sony is designing some continuity in *their* product line...
-dq
I just got back from spending 2 1/2 days at the Orlando hamfest. I made
quite a haul but here is my best find by far!
<http://www.classiccmp.org/hp/RCA/rca.jpg> As you can see it does work!
In case you don't recognize it, look here
<http://www.classiccmp.org/hp/RCA/rca2.jpg>. Right now it's in the hands
of a certain nameless CC Lister in Southern Georgia. I'm just hoping I'll
get to see it again!
Besides that nice trinket I also got two Gould logic analyzers, a
MicroMint Std-bus computer, some Multibus card cages, some good data books,
a Data I/O 19 EPROM programmer with a GangPak plug in and the PAL
programmig plug-ins, an Intel iUP 201 EPROM programmer, a 5 Mb Bernoulli
box for the MacIntosh (in it's original box with three new sealed
cartridges), an Alphapro 101 daisy wheel printer that's also in it's
original box, and finally a 16 Mb Matrox G4+ AGP video card for $20.
joe
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vintage Computer Festival [mailto:vcf@vintage.org]
> I have no idea what various DAT formats there are so I'll
> have to research
> that. Ditto for the WORM drives (I have one more somewhere in my
> collection).
Basically, there are DDS-1 through DDS-4. A DDS-4 drive should read
and write any of the previous if I'm not mistaken. The problem is
that compression is brand-specific, generally, and possibly model-
specific (though I haven't heard of it being done...)
In other words, if your tape has hardware compression, you may be out
of luck without the exact drive that wrote it.
I have no idea about D-8, on the other hand. :) What I do know is
that my Eliant 820 will use 160 meter tapes, but only (I think) if
they're data tapes (meaning they have the MRS stuff in them...) Some
other Exabyte drives will supposedly use 160 meter tapes without MRS,
but will write only so much data to them, and won't read or write data
on any 160 meter cart at quite the density of the Eliant 820.
Anyway, you may need more than 1 8mm drive.
> Did the Bernoulli Box have a proprietary interface? If so,
> does anyone
> have one they want to get rid of?
I think they were SCSI, but don't take my word for it...
> least 500MB. I'm still trying to figure out what QIC-1000 is.
1.2G variant of the same technology used in QIC-120, I believe.
They're pretty large, klunky cartridges. Around the size of VHS,
but thinner, and not quite as wide (I think). :) I also think the
drives are downward compatible with QIC-120.
> I guess what I really want to know is if the various tape drives from
> different manufacturers for a certain specification, say
> QIC-40/80, read
> and write the same low- or high-level format. So for instance, if I
> create a tape on a Colorado drive and stick it into a Conner
> drive, will
> the Conner be able to read it?
I think so, ignoring the above issue with hardware compression, which
may have also been a problem on these drives if they had it. :) Again,
don't take my word for it.
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
> ----------
> From: Doc
>
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
>
> > DDS-2 and DDS-3 use physically different media. I don't know how this
> > figures if the standards are all supposed to be backward compatible.
>
> Actually, DDS and DDS2 different media, but not as in
> different form factors. IIRC, DDS1 is 90m, DDS2 is 120m, and DDS3 is
> also 120m. They have and identifier embedded in the media that tells
> the drive which DDS the tape is. I know for sure that a DDS1 drive will
> simply spit out a DDS2 or DDS3 tape, and I think that holds true up the
> line.
> A DDS2 drive will read DDS1 archives, and write a DDS1 tape in DDS1
> format. I dunno about DDS3. Every shop I've worked with who used DDS3
> drives used DDS3 tapes exclusively.
>
> Doc
>
---
DDS3 is 125m. Have one right here :) DDS3 drives work fine with DDS2
tapes, under NT4 and VMS. That's the size combination we're using here at
work.
--- David A Woyciesjes
--- C & IS Support Specialist
--- Yale University Press
--- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu
--- (203) 432-0953
--- ICQ # - 90581
Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001
Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash
> >There are currently 5 DAT formats (DDS, DDS-1, DDS-2, DDS-3,
> and DDS-4)
> >and all are backward compatible.
>
> But, can a drive from manufacturer "A" read a DDS-1 tape written on
> manufacturer "B's" drive? It's been my understanding that sometimes even
> different model drives from the same manufacturer can't read the same tape.
You're supposed to be OK if you didn't used compression,
or also OK if you used software compression (assuming you
can find a program on the target platform that understands
the compression).
It's when you use hardware compression that you may be screwed.
-dq
Christopher Smith wrote:
[re. broken SGI Indy]
> He was able to find the faulty part. Honestly, I wish I'd been
> able to do that, myself, but I don't have the stack of SGI pieces
> to do it :)
On an only slightly related note, IMHO the build quality and general
longevity of Silicon Graphics hardware really isn't what you'd hope
of kit that cost so much new...
I've seen Sun boxes that have been through the mill several times by
the look of things, but flick the switch and you're up and running
(possibility of needing to solder a battery onto the PROM
notwithstanding.)
Personal (limited, I grant you ;-) experience of Indys on the other
hand suggest you need at least 3 candidates handy if you want to put
together a working combination of power supply, processor and mobo/PROM.
And the chassis is horribly weak - the way the power supply clips into
place is very neat, but also makes it structurally very poor at the
join (L-shaped computer, anyone?)
I also don't think I've yet forgiven SGI for making the power
supply (simple slide-in/slide-out with two thumbscrews) on the O2000
a non user replaceable part - i.e. they won't sell you one without
a service contract and an engineer round to plug it in. And trying
to get an SGI Challenge to actually see all the devices on its SCSI
bus without trying them in 100 different permutations can keep you
occupied for at least an afternoon...
Which isn't to say I don't love 'em, an Indy is my main workstation at
home & the sight of SGI rapidly going down the tubes is deeply sad...
Cheers,
Tim.
--
Tim Walls at home in Croydon - Reply to tim(a)snowgoons.fsnet.co.uk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) [mailto:cisin@xenosoft.com]
> > Iomega ZIP (IDE)
> available internal and external, also in parallel, SCSI, and the "Zip
> PLUS" is BOTH parallel and SCSI.
I took his use of IDE there to mean that he got the internal ATA type
drive. I suppose given the proper definition of IDE, both the parallel
and USB versions could be called IDE.
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
>If you use Mac OS 7-9 on a used Mac and go with a used copy of Filemaker
>instead of Paradox, they are *far* more likely to be able to maintain the
>program themselves,
...
>Disclaimer: I don't run a business, so I may not know what I'm talking
>about. Anybody knowledgable here, please chime in. I think this is a
>*vital* topic for classic-computers, BTW, as keeping the machines
>productive is far and away the best way to keep them alive and known. The
>upgrade path availability is admittedly slightly off-topic, but relevant to
>the discussion.
FileMaker Pro was designed with the office Secretary in mind. It was
meant for the average boss to hand the program to the average word
processor literate secretary and tell them to create a database.
It is VERY user friendly, and VERY quick and easy to create solutions. It
has also grown significantly over the years into a rather powerful
database system. It is NOT as powerful as some other applications out
there (I know Access is more powerful due to its VB abilities)... but for
a good chunk of database needs you can use FMP to do your complete
solution.
I have been making some rather complex solutions in FMP for years, and
once in a while hit roadblocks with it, but usually can get to a work
around (sometimes kludgy, but usually doable). But I will take the
development speed vs loss of the super high end abilities any day.
FMP is also ODBC complient (I don't know to what extent, I keep all my
work right in FMP, so I have never used the ODBC interface). And FMP can
publish to the web instantly, or you can develop full web abilities with
FMP as the backend.
It is fully cross platform (Mac and Win32)... I mean fully... there are
really only two minor issues with moving back and forth. You need to make
sure you use standard fonts that are available on both platforms (stick
to Ariel, Times New Roman, and Courier New and you should be fine)... and
when laying out items on the screen, it is best to use the T-Bars or
Windows will sometimes shift where something is slightly.
But the database works on both platforms unchanged. I generally do all my
FMP development on the Mac, and the move it to a WinNT hosted FMP server
where winNT clients log into it to do their work... and I still log in
using my Mac for admin stuff... same database, transparent access.
All in all... if your users aren't likely to know how to work with a
database system... and you want them to be able to manage it in the
future... I highely recommend FMP... or if you just want to get the job
done in half the time of other systems.
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Doc wrote:
> Congratulations. What does "chuffed" mean?
"Happy"... well, in this case "really happy", as I've been after
a VAX for yonks (a long time) :-)
Thanks to those who answered, and those who didn't but silently
cursed "RTFM" :-) I came across the OpenVMS online docs yesterday...
Cheers
Al.
[late reply because I get the daily digest]
??????????
:-)))
Greetings
----- Mensaje Original -----
Remitente: Chad Fernandez <fernande(a)internet1.net>
Fecha: Jueves, Febrero 14, 2002 9:38 am
Asunto: @@Rare@@Look@@ you can't pass this up!!!! :-)
> Silly isn't it :-)
>
