8 May
2007
8 May
'07
9:50 a.m.
On 08/05/2007 17:04, Chuck Guzis wrote:
8 mm wasn't bad. At about that time, we were
heavily involved in
specifying tape for customers and we tended to rank things this way:
DLT > 8mm > 4mm DAT > Travan > QIC.
Interesting. That's about my assessment too, though I don't use tapes
all that much.
8mm, like DAT and DLT is an immediate-verify (read
after write)
technology and isn't bad for the time. There was the same business
about confusing 8mm video carts with 8mm data carts as there was with
4 mm DAT audio with 4 mm data. Manufacturers said not to substitute,
but a lot of individuals did.
Although I see lots of 8mm video tapes used for data, and relatively few
genuine 8mm data tapes, whereas I see lots of DDS data tapes and very
few audio DAT tapes. In fact, I seem to remember that you can't use DAT
for data, (or was it can't use DDS for audio?) straight off. I stand to
be corrected on that, of course :-)
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York