8 Mar
2023
8 Mar
'23
5:20 p.m.
On 3/8/23 06:19, Paul Koning wrote:
I wouldn't exclude those, certainly not if they
are relevant to the evolution of the technology. Are X1 tapes (and Eliott tapes if they
are the same format, which I don't know) in some way anticipating LINCtape and
DECtape? Are they an independent invention of roughly the same concept? For that matter,
would you exclude DECtape on the grounds that it's single vendor? I hope not. For
that matter, I suspect the Uniservo I format is specific to Univac, yet you can't very
well exclude that from a history of magnetic tape data recording.
I view "captive formats" such as DECtape to be evolutionary dead ends.
Consider, for example, the Datamatic 1000 tapes--I doubt that more than
a handful of people here have ever heard of the system. A captive format.
Or the early Uniservo metal tapes?
Or the tapes used in the IBM 2321 Data Cell or 3850 MSS? Captive
formats and evolutionary dead-ends.
How about the stuff that never made it out of the lab? Such as the CDC
SCROLL? I suspect that I may be one of few who even have heard of the
beast--yet it was included in our forward-looking boilerplate in STAR
proposals.
How about the 9 track 1/2" 3200 fci tapes? Not mentioned yet.
Quarter-inch cartridge tapes were quite varied. Although looking the
same at first glance, there were significant differences. Consider the
Alphamat...Zetamat 3M series of quarter inch tapes. (e.g. DC600HC).
No optical sensing of BOT/EOT/media type holes--all done with
preformatting. Those were popular with ADIC crowd--I have a couple of
those drives in the eventual case that someone digs a tape up from the
trash heap of history.
How about the adapters that allowed use of VHS cassette equipment for
backup?
All dead-ends.
Before disks were affordable, or even available, half-inch tape was used
as primary storage. Consider the 7090 IBSYS shops--all tape operations.
--Chuck
8 Mar
8 Mar
5:42 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
On Mar 8, 2023, at 12:20 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 3/8/23 06:19, Paul Koning wrote:
I would disagree with that blanket assertion, for two reasons. One is that something
isn't an "evolutionary dead end" only if nothing later was inspired by it
and constructed, to some extent, along similar lines. In that sense the Uniservo tapes
are not at all a dead end; instead, they are the ancestor of all later tapes. Properties
like metal vs. plastic media and 6 tracks vs. 7 or 9 or more are details.
Second, I would consider a format to be significant if it had a major market presence and
major place in the technology space. In that sense, DECtape I clearly belongs -- being
either the primary or a significant secondary storage device for a decade or two of some
of the world's most successful computer lines.
Similarly, is DLT a "dead end"? It was captive to some extent until it spread
out, but then LTO replaced it. On the other hand, isn't LTO clearly an evolutionary
variant of DLT?
I'd agree that there are a number of other formats that were neither significant
players nor a significant influence on later work. The CDC 14-track tapes would fit that
description, and the Eliot or X1 10-track tapes most likely as well. But I would argue
that "if it wasn't an industry or ISO standard it doesn't count" is too
restrictive a view, especially if you aim to produce a history of the technology space.
paul
I wouldn't exclude those, certainly not if
they are relevant to the evolution of the technology. Are X1 tapes (and Eliott tapes if
they are the same format, which I don't know) in some way anticipating LINCtape and
DECtape? Are they an independent invention of roughly the same concept? For that matter,
would you exclude DECtape on the grounds that it's single vendor? I hope not. For
that matter, I suspect the Uniservo I format is specific to Univac, yet you can't very
well exclude that from a history of magnetic tape data recording.
I view "captive formats" such as DECtape to be evolutionary dead ends.
Consider, for example, the Datamatic 1000 tapes--I doubt that more than
a handful of people here have ever heard of the system. A captive format.
Or the early Uniservo metal tapes? 
5:54 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
I hate to throw a spanner in the works but no one has mentioned U-Matic
tapes. Normally used for video recording the early CD audio and CD-Rom
industry encoded the digital image on to U-Matic tapes which were then
used to drive the laser for writing to the CD Master.
On 3/8/2023 11:42 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
On Mar 8, 2023, at 12:20 PM, Chuck Guzis via
cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 3/8/23 06:19, Paul Koning wrote:
I would disagree with that blanket assertion,
for two reasons. One is that something isn't an "evolutionary dead end"
only if nothing later was inspired by it and constructed, to some extent, along similar
lines. In that sense the Uniservo tapes are not at all a dead end; instead, they are the
ancestor of all later tapes. Properties like metal vs. plastic media and 6 tracks vs. 7
or 9 or more are details.
Second, I would consider a format to be significant if it had a major market presence and
major place in the technology space. In that sense, DECtape I clearly belongs -- being
either the primary or a significant secondary storage device for a decade or two of some
of the world's most successful computer lines.
Similarly, is DLT a "dead end"? It was captive to some extent until it spread
out, but then LTO replaced it. On the other hand, isn't LTO clearly an evolutionary
variant of DLT?
I'd agree that there are a number of other formats that were neither significant
players nor a significant influence on later work. The CDC 14-track tapes would fit that
description, and the Eliot or X1 10-track tapes most likely as well. But I would argue
that "if it wasn't an industry or ISO standard it doesn't count" is too
restrictive a view, especially if you aim to produce a history of the technology space.
paul
I wouldn't exclude those, certainly not if
they are relevant to the evolution of the technology. Are X1 tapes (and Eliott tapes if
they are the same format, which I don't know) in some way anticipating LINCtape and
DECtape? Are they an independent invention of roughly the same concept? For that matter,
would you exclude DECtape on the grounds that it's single vendor? I hope not. For
that matter, I suspect the Uniservo I format is specific to Univac, yet you can't very
well exclude that from a history of magnetic tape data recording.
I view
"captive formats" such as DECtape to be evolutionary dead ends.
Consider, for example, the Datamatic 1000 tapes--I doubt that more than
a handful of people here have ever heard of the system. A captive format.
Or the early Uniservo metal tapes?
6:02 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
On 3/8/23 09:42, Paul Koning wrote:
Second, I would consider a format to be significant if
it had a major market presence and major place in the technology space. In that sense,
DECtape I clearly belongs -- being either the primary or a significant secondary storage
device for a decade or two of some of the world's most successful computer lines.
And all of them DEC. No IBM, CDC, UNIVAC, etc. As to what it inspired,
I can't say.
Similarly, is DLT a "dead end"? It was
captive to some extent until it spread out, but then LTO replaced it. On the other hand,
isn't LTO clearly an evolutionary variant of DLT?
But DLT was used in systems made by various manufacturers. Yes, it
originated at DEC, purchased by Quantum and used on various systems. In
fact, Quantum probably made the bulk of the drives, not DEC. Being a
cross-vendor interchange medium, I'd include it.
The same for DDS and 8mm (Exabyte) media. Exabyte didn't make computer
systems, so it necessarily had to be cross-vendor. DDS is, of course,
DAT re-imagined.
How about the 2mm Pereos tapes? Never really took hold and used Sony
audio mechanisms. I'd call that a dead-end, not being aware of
anything that it inspired.
--Chuck
6:07 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
I think it remarkable in retrospect that the original Star Trek (ca.
1966) used countless mentions of "computer tapes" in the 23rd century.
A lack of foresight on the part of the script writers?
What can we predict for the year 2250?
--Chuck
6:19 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Guzis via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 6:08 PM
To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
Cc: Chuck Guzis <cclist(a)sydex.com>
Subject: [cctalk] Re: Age of Tape Formats?
I think it remarkable in retrospect that the original Star Trek (ca.
1966) used countless mentions of "computer tapes" in the 23rd century.
Yes, but Space 1999 still had slide rules..
A lack of foresight on the part of the script writers?
What can we predict for the year 2250?
--Chuck
Dave
6:32 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
On 3/8/23 10:19, Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk wrote:
Yes, but Space 1999 still had slide rules..
I thought this discussion by one of the JPL people working on the tape
mechanism for Voyager (1980) might be interesting to some:
https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/2053/how-was-magnetic-tape-decay-…
--Chuck
9 Mar
9 Mar
12:47 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
On 3/8/2023 1:19 PM, Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk wrote:
It's 2023 and so do I. Have started teaching my grandson what it is and
how it works.
bill
-----Original
Message-----
From: Chuck Guzis via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 6:08 PM
To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
Cc: Chuck Guzis <cclist(a)sydex.com>
Subject: [cctalk] Re: Age of Tape Formats?
I think it remarkable in retrospect that the original Star Trek (ca.
1966) used countless mentions of "computer tapes" in the 23rd century.
Yes, but Space 1999 still had slide rules..
8 Mar
8 Mar
6:39 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
On 2023-03-08 11:07 a.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
I think it remarkable in retrospect that the original
Star Trek (ca.
1966) used countless mentions of "computer tapes" in the 23rd century.
A lack of foresight on the part of the script writers?
What can we predict for the year 2250?
--Chuck
The use of the old tape drives as 'computers' still found in the movies.
Ben.
10:30 p.m.
New subject: Age of Tape Formats?
On Mar 8, 2023, at 10:07 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
I think it remarkable in retrospect that the original Star Trek (ca.
1966) used countless mentions of "computer tapes" in the 23rd century.
A lack of foresight on the part of the script writers?
What can we predict for the year 2250?
--Chuck
Tape is dead, Long live tape!
Every time someone proclaims that tape is dead, I laugh. How many here realize that there
is now Tape-based Object Storage?
Zane
623
days inactive
624
days old
9 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
ben -
Bill Gunshannon -
Chuck Guzis -
dave.g4ugm＠gmail.com -
Mike Katz -
Paul Koning -
Zane Healy