13 Feb
2002
13 Feb
'02
3:31 a.m.
Ok, I scored quite a few drives for my data conversion machine project
yesterday:
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
Colorado T4000 (SCSI)
Exabyte EXB-8200 (SCSI)
Bernoulli Box 20+20 (DC-37 proprietary?)
WORM Drive of some type (SCSI)
QIC-150 tape drive (SCSI)
Iomega 150 MultiDisk (SCSI)
Iomega 90 Pro (SCSI)
DAT of some type (SCSI)
Iomega Jaz (SCSI)
Iomega ZIP (IDE)
Conner 420 (floppy interface)
Colorado 250 (floppy interface)
Archive 4320NT DAT (SCSI)
Conner 700 (floppy interface)
Colorado T1000 (floppy)
SyQuest EZ135 (SCSI)
The trick now is to figure out what is downward compatible with what and
eliminate those drives. The Conner 700 is obviously compatible with the
420, the Colorado T4000 is probably downward compatible with the T1000,
the Iomega 150 is downward compatible with the 90, I think the Ditto drive
is basically the same as the Colorado Jumbo drives and the Conners, so I
would want to choose the one that is most downward compatible in terms of
maximum storage.
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).
Did the Bernoulli Box have a proprietary interface? If so, does anyone
have one they want to get rid of?
I would imagine I can hook as many of the floppy interface drives as I
need to a single cable, providing I can crimp on the proper connectors.
Will there be any issues with conflicts or power? I imagine as long as
I'm not using two drives on the same cable at a time then I should be
fine.
I think I have QIC-40/80 covered. My Tecmar QT-125e does QIC-2 up to
125MB, but from what I can tell from research that standard goes up to at
least 500MB. I'm still trying to figure out what QIC-1000 is.
Tecmar is still around (www.tecmar.com) but they only do Travan and DAT.
Their older products (QIC and 8MM) are obsolete and they don't have
drivers available.
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?
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
4:42 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Jim Arnott wrote:
the Bernoullis that I have are both straight SCSI 1.
(90 & 230)
Those are the later models that use the 5.25" sized carthridges. The one
I'm talking about uses the 10" carthridges and is in an external box about
the size of a smaller desktop PC.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
2:28 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Jim Arnott wrote:
Is this the 10MB one that looks like an old XT? If so, it needs a special
interface board and cable. I'm fairly sure I have an extra board
somewhere, but it might be awhile before I unbury it. You'll still have to
find the cable somewhere, since I know I don't have an extra. Some of the
44MB drives also need a special interface board. They are SCSI, but not
standard SCSI, so they won't work without their special boards. I have
some of those boards somewhere too, but again, no cables.
-Toth
the Bernoullis that I have are both straight SCSI
1. (90 & 230)
Those are the later models that use the 5.25" sized carthridges. The
one I'm talking about uses the 10" carthridges and is in an external
box about the size of a smaller desktop PC.
8:05 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Is this the 10MB one that looks like an old XT? If so,
it needs a special
Apparently it's 20MB (20+20).
interface board and cable. I'm fairly sure I have
an extra board
somewhere, but it might be awhile before I unbury it. You'll still have to
find the cable somewhere, since I know I don't have an extra. Some of the
I'm working out a deal with Don on a board. I'm sure the cable will be
easy to find at the ACCRC.
44MB drives also need a special interface board. They
are SCSI, but not
standard SCSI, so they won't work without their special boards. I have
some of those boards somewhere too, but again, no cables.
That's lame. But no worry, I'm using the 200C model which handles
44/88/200 carthridges.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
8:13 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Well, you still need a dual 10MB drive then. Those things look just like
an old IBM PC/XT system, but are slightly larger.
-Toth
Is this the 10MB one that looks like an old XT?
If so, it needs a special
Apparently it's 20MB (20+20).
6:28 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Well, you still need a dual 10MB drive then. Those
things look just like
an old IBM PC/XT system, but are slightly larger.
Can't the 20+20 read the 10MB media?
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
14 Feb
14 Feb
5:28 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
I don't think so. The 10MB media is physically larger IIRC.
-Toth
Well, you still need a dual 10MB drive then.
Those things look just like
an old IBM PC/XT system, but are slightly larger.
Can't the 20+20 read the 10MB media? 
8:38 a.m.
Nope ... the cartridges are identical, except that the drive knows from the
holes which size it has in place.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tothwolf" <tothwolf(a)concentric.net>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
I don't think so. The 10MB media is physically larger IIRC.
-Toth
Well, you still need a dual 10MB drive then.
Those things look just like
an old IBM PC/XT system, but are slightly larger.
Can't the 20+20 read the 10MB media?
8:22 a.m.
Yes, they can read, but not write or format them. In fact, the utilitites
that are provided with the 20+20 drive pair won't low-level format the 20MB
media either. It simply rewrites the intermediate level format that it uses
internally. I've tried bulk-reasing seemingly unuseable packs and found that
the old drivers and utilities can recover packs that are useless with the
later software. I don't remember whether this included the 20 MB drives,
though, that is, I don't remember whether the old software would even handle
the 20 MB drives. I may have to give it a try someday.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sellam Ismail" <foo(a)siconic.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Festival
Well, you still need a dual 10MB drive then.
Those things look just like
an old IBM PC/XT system, but are slightly larger.
Can't the 20+20 read the 10MB media?
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com
*
2:34 a.m.
Perhaps not ... the 20 MB drives can read the 10 MB media, but can't write it.
It depends on whether he thinks he needs to produce 10 MB cartridges. If he
wants to reformat faulty media, the A10FMT20 (?) program will do that in the
old, full-height drives, but won't do the 10's or the 20's in the half-height
versions, don't ask me why ... Of course the A10FMT20 utility won't work with
the newer adapters, either. You've got to have the original drives and the
original adapters (approximately the size of the original PC FDC and often
confused for one) in order to repair damaged 10 MB media, and even then it
only works a limited portion of the time.
The old A10 drive box, which could have either a single drive or a pair, (I've
got one sitting underneath my printer) is, as Sellam said, very reminiscent of
an XT box, though somewhat deeper. Its heigh and width are pretty close,
though. They're quite a bit noisier and heavier, though.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tothwolf" <tothwolf(a)concentric.net>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 3:13 AM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
>
> > Is this the 10MB one that looks like an old XT? If so, it needs a
special
Apparently it's 20MB (20+20).
Well, you still need a dual 10MB drive then. Those things look just like
an old IBM PC/XT system, but are slightly larger.
-Toth
13 Feb
13 Feb
1:30 p.m.
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).
Could you report your findings on the DAT formats? I'm really interested in
that!
Did the Bernoulli Box have a proprietary interface?
If so, does anyone
have one they want to get rid of?
IIRC, it did.
Zane
5:29 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Zane H. Healy wrote:
Here's what I've come up with.
There are currently 5 DAT formats (DDS, DDS-1, DDS-2, DDS-3, and DDS-4)
and all are backward compatible.
According to this site:
http://www.ls.eso.org/lasilla/Telescopes/2p2T/E2p2M/WFI/tapes/TapeType.html
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.
Here's a great page on backup tape in general:
http://www.pctechguide.com/15tape.htm
Here's a troubling statement I found on this webpage:
"One of the drawbacks with QIC is incompatibility. The format has suffered
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).
Could you report your findings on the DAT formats? I'm really interested in
that! from an overabundance of standards over the years -
there are more than
120 currently - and not all QIC drives are compatible with all
standards."
Oy. Looks like I'll have to hang on to every single different tape drive
I find to make sure I can recover any QIC formats that get thrown at me.
At least until I find a definitive reference that tells me what drives can
read what formats.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
2:50 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Here's a troubling statement I found on this
webpage:
"One of the drawbacks with QIC is incompatibility. The format has
suffered from an overabundance of standards over the years - there are
more than 120 currently - and not all QIC drives are compatible with
all standards."
Oy. Looks like I'll have to hang on to every single different tape
drive I find to make sure I can recover any QIC formats that get
thrown at me. At least until I find a definitive reference that tells
me what drives can read what formats.
Well, I'll help write up a list of drives if you want to start one. Might
be a good reference to have out on the 'net anyway.
-Toth
8:10 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Do.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
Oy. Looks
like I'll have to hang on to every single different tape
drive I find to make sure I can recover any QIC formats that get
thrown at me. At least until I find a definitive reference that tells
me what drives can read what formats.
Well, I'll help write up a list of drives if you want to start one. Might
be a good reference to have out on the 'net anyway. 
3:15 p.m.
All the DDS-x cartridges have holes in the bottom edge which the drive
senses to determine what write current, etc to use. Some older DDS-2
drives don't have enough sensor switches to detect DDS-3 media and
will treat them as DDS-1 media (binary, eh?). This means your 120m
tape is thought as 60m, but with the wrong write current so you get
lotsa errors too...
clint
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Zane H. Healy wrote:
Here's what I've come up with.
There are currently 5 DAT formats (DDS, DDS-1, DDS-2, DDS-3, and DDS-4)
and all are backward compatible.
According to this site:
http://www.ls.eso.org/lasilla/Telescopes/2p2T/E2p2M/WFI/tapes/TapeType.html
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.
Here's a great page on backup tape in general:
http://www.pctechguide.com/15tape.htm
Here's a troubling statement I found on this webpage:
"One of the drawbacks with QIC is incompatibility. The format has suffered
from an overabundance of standards over the years - there are more than
120 currently - and not all QIC drives are compatible with all standards."
Oy. Looks like I'll have to hang on to every single different tape drive
I find to make sure I can recover any QIC formats that get thrown at me.
At least until I find a definitive reference that tells me what drives can
read what formats.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
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).
Could you report your findings on the DAT formats? I'm really interested in
that! 
3:44 p.m.
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
10:20 p.m.
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.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
6:29 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Zane H. Healy wrote:
That I am not sure of. I would imagine the standard specifies both a
physical and logical format. However, the backup software supplied by
each manufacturer may write the data to the drive in a different logical
format.
I'll let you know if I uncover more information on this.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
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. 
14 Feb
14 Feb
8:31 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Zane H. Healy wrote:
That I am not sure of. I would imagine the standard specifies both a
physical and logical format. However, the backup software supplied by
each manufacturer may write the data to the drive in a different logical
format.
Other than specific format, they are supposed to be compatible...
I know I can read/write and transfer between DDS-1 on both TLZ06 (Seagate
drive) and HP 6000 (Mitsumi DDS-2 drive) without problems.
Before CDRW became common, I've used uncompressed DDS-1 tapes as an
interchange media quite a bit with almost no problems.
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.
I'll let you know if I uncover more information on this.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
Peter Wallace
13 Feb
13 Feb
10:53 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Zane H. Healy wrote:
I've never seen that with either 4mm DDS-x or with 8mm DAT formats.
We do classroom loads of RS/6000s from tape quite often, making
tapes on, and installing from, a very wide assortment of drives. I've
never seen a load fail if the drive was rated for the tape format.
Doc
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. 
14 Feb
14 Feb
7:38 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1600 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020214/ee6f7615/at…
13 Feb
13 Feb
2:44 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
Exabyte EXB-8200 (SCSI)
I just found one of these out in storage too ;)
I also found an 8500, but it is missing the plastic door part that snaps
on. If anyone comes across this part loose somewhere, let me know. This
particular drive is black, not the more common beige.
WORM Drive of some type (SCSI)
What size?
QIC-150 tape drive (SCSI)
What brand/model?
Iomega Jaz (SCSI)
Iomega ZIP (IDE)
Iomega made a 100MB and 250MB zip drive, as well as a 1GB and 2GB Jaz
drive. The 250MB zip drive can read 100MB disks, but can't format them.
Same situation for the 2GB and 1GB Jaz drives. The Jaz drive is only
available with a SCSI interface, both sizes and both internal and external
versions. The zip 100 was available in *many* configurations, but AFAIK,
Iomega never produced an internal zip 250 with an interface other than
IDE.
I would imagine I can hook as many of the floppy
interface drives as I
need to a single cable, providing I can crimp on the proper
connectors. Will there be any issues with conflicts or power? I
imagine as long as I'm not using two drives on the same cable at a
time then I should be fine.
Not all brands of drives use the same cable, there are about half a dozen
different cables out there for these drives. You can't connect more than
one floppy tape drive to the floppy interface at the same time. They will
conflict with each other if you do.
I think I have QIC-40/80 covered. My Tecmar QT-125e
does QIC-2 up to
125MB, but from what I can tell from research that standard goes up to
at least 500MB. I'm still trying to figure out what QIC-1000 is.
Many companies use their own tape formats, so you have quite a large
number of drives you still need ;)
the QIC-11/24/etc type drives go up to 2GB IIRC.
Tecmar is still around (www.tecmar.com) but they only
do Travan and DAT.
Their older products (QIC and 8MM) are obsolete and they don't have
drivers available.
Most of the 8mm drives, and many SCSI drives for that matter, would have
been used under *nix, so tapes for those drives would likely be plain
old tar.
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?
Not always. Many manufacturers used their own formats, especially for the
40MB tapes.
-Toth
8:09 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
5.25ish"
It's pretty generic. The only reason I know it's QIC-150 is because
someone made a lable and stuck it to the drive.
Wonderful.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
WORM Drive of
some type (SCSI)
What size? QIC-150 tape
drive (SCSI)
What brand/model? Iomega made a 100MB and 250MB zip drive, as well as a
1GB and 2GB Jaz
drive. The 250MB zip drive can read 100MB disks, but can't format them.
Yes, I have a 250 in my main PC that came with it new (from Dell <spit>).
Same situation for the 2GB and 1GB Jaz drives. The Jaz
drive is only
I'll need a 2GB Jaz then. Should be starting to see them for pennies in a
couple years so no rush.
Not all brands of drives use the same cable, there are
about half a dozen
different cables out there for these drives. You can't connect more than
one floppy tape drive to the floppy interface at the same time. They will
conflict with each other if you do.
Only if they are being used simultaneously, no?
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?
Not always. Many manufacturers used their own formats, especially for the
40MB tapes.
8:10 p.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Wonderful.
Yup, it is. Your best bet might be to pick up nearly every tape drive you
find that isn't identical to one you already have...unless you want spares
anyway.
-Toth
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
If you connect more than one tape drive to the floppy interface, they will
conflict with each other. Even if you disconnect their power connector,
but leave the data cable connected, you will have "weird" problems.
Not all brands of drives use the same cable,
there are about half a dozen
different cables out there for these drives. You can't connect more than
one floppy tape drive to the floppy interface at the same time. They will
conflict with each other if you do.
Only if they are being used simultaneously, no? 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?
Not always. Many manufacturers used their own formats, especially for the
40MB tapes.
6:27 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
If you connect more than one tape drive to the floppy
interface, they will
conflict with each other. Even if you disconnect their power connector,
but leave the data cable connected, you will have "weird" problems.
Why?
Hmm, after thinking about this a little bit I can see that there might be
a conflict. But I would still like a technical answer to my "why"
question :)
Yup, it is. Your best bet might be to pick up nearly
every tape drive you
find that isn't identical to one you already have...unless you want spares
anyway.
That's what I'm doing. I guess I'll need to have a cabinet just for
storing drives.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
14 Feb
14 Feb
5:11 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Drive Select.
Add a switch to disconnect 10, 12, and 14. (DS0, DS1, DS2)
Then you can leave the power on to the drive, but it will not be selected,
and won't interfere with the others.
Run all other signals through to all drives, but run the drive select
lines through a switch to control which drive you want. Leave 14
disconnected (most drives and software expect the drive to be #0 or #1),
and get a 2P50T rotary switch?
If you connect
more than one tape drive to the floppy interface, they will
conflict with each other. Even if you disconnect their power connector,
but leave the data cable connected, you will have "weird" problems.
Why?
Hmm, after thinking about this a little bit I can see that there might be
a conflict. But I would still like a technical answer to my "why"
question :)
5:31 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
Drive Select.
Add a switch to disconnect 10, 12, and 14. (DS0, DS1, DS2)
Then you can leave the power on to the drive, but it will not be selected,
and won't interfere with the others.
Run all other signals through to all drives, but run the drive select
lines through a switch to control which drive you want. Leave 14
disconnected (most drives and software expect the drive to be #0 or #1),
and get a 2P50T rotary switch?
That would work well if all the tape drives that use the floppy interface
followed the rules, but not all do. I guess it would be possible to build
a board with some logic chips that could isolate individual drives from
the bus, but I think it would be much easier for now to only connect one
drive at a time.
-Toth
If you connect more than one tape drive to the
floppy interface, they will
conflict with each other. Even if you disconnect their power connector,
but leave the data cable connected, you will have "weird" problems.
Why?
Hmm, after thinking about this a little bit I can see that there might be
a conflict. But I would still like a technical answer to my "why"
question :)
13 Feb
13 Feb
9:49 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
That would work well if all the tape drives that use
the floppy
interface followed the rules, but not all do. I guess it would be
possible to build a board with some logic chips that could isolate
individual drives from the bus, but I think it would be much easier for
now to only connect one drive at a time.
Can you elucidate? How can a floppy interface tape drive not follow the
rules and still work?
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
14 Feb
14 Feb
8:12 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 843 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020214/6dbe9f0a/at…
11:24 a.m.
Actually, in the current "standard" for IBM-style implementation of the FD
cable, there is a 3rd drive select. The fact that the selects aren't used in
the normal way is no surprise, but the result is that you can have 2 floppy
drives and a tape drive, but you can't use the floppy drives while you are
running the tape drive because there's no telling who uses that 3rd select
signal for something else.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Duell" <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Actually they _have_ to break the rules. If they followed the rules,
they'd appear as a floppy drive, and you'd be limited to the tape drive
and one floppy drive on the cable. Most people want(ed?) to have 2 floppy
drives + the tape drive, so the tape drive has to break the rules for
drive selection. It can't simply use one of the drive select lines.
-tony
That would work well if all the tape drives that
use the floppy
interface followed the rules, but not all do. I guess it would be
possible to build a board with some logic chips that could isolate
individual drives from the bus, but I think it would be much easier for
now to only connect one drive at a time.
Can you elucidate? How can a floppy interface tape drive not follow the
rules and still work?
8:51 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Been quite a long time since I had to fight with those kinds of drives,
but certain brands and models did things their own way. I don't recall
exact brands/models now, but I'm sure you'll find them over time. Some had
special cables that swapped signals around or removed other signals from
the connector completely. There were even some that used custom
pass-through cables that would feed certain signals for the floppy drive
through the tape drive. Old tape drives for PC systems are going to be the
hardest part of getting a data conversion "lab" set up.
-Toth
That would work well if all the tape drives that
use the floppy
interface followed the rules, but not all do. I guess it would be
possible to build a board with some logic chips that could isolate
individual drives from the bus, but I think it would be much easier for
now to only connect one drive at a time.
Can you elucidate? How can a floppy interface tape drive not follow the
rules and still work?
6:03 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
Hmmm. I don't doubt that there were a lot of really weird ones, but
I wonder which rules they don't follow. My experience with floppy
controller run tape drives is limited to the 10 to 40 M stuff like the
Irwin and Archive, which were intended to coexist with floppy drives. I
was able to leave several connected to 286 machines on my DS switched
cables. (One of my 286's had 6 floppy drives and 2 tape drives on one
controller card)
(Some of my machines also had switches to disconnect the Index line for
easier reading of WD formats, and on one I had an inline switch module
with 34 slide switches - If you could find those, it would provide
maximum versatility)
Run all other
signals through to all drives, but run the drive select
lines through a switch to control which drive you want. Leave 14
disconnected (most drives and software expect the drive to be #0 or #1),
and get a 2P50T rotary switch?
That would work well if all the tape drives that
use the floppy interface
followed the rules, but not all do. I guess it would be possible to build
a board with some logic chips that could isolate individual drives from
the bus, but I think it would be much easier for now to only connect one
drive at a time.
10:04 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 560 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020215/71da233f/at…
13 Feb
13 Feb
5:22 p.m.
The 10+10 and 20+20 Bernoulli boxes did, indeed have a "nearly" SCSI interface
that was proprietary to Iomega, thanks, in part, to that DC37-cable
implementation they whipped up. It wasn't the same as what anyone else who
used that connector used, nor were the others, among which was Xebec with
their "Sider" drive, identical one to another.
I can come up with a host adapter, cable, and drivers, if you have something
to swap. I've got several of these old Bernoulli boxes, including quite a few
adapter boards, some of which actually work OK as 8-bit SCSI adapters.
Unfortunately, the media formatting software only works if you have their
adapter.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vintage Computer Festival" <vcf(a)vintage.org>
To: "Classic Computers Mailing List" <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:31 AM
Subject: Drive inventory
Ok, I scored quite a few drives for my data conversion machine project
yesterday:
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
Colorado T4000 (SCSI)
Exabyte EXB-8200 (SCSI)
Bernoulli Box 20+20 (DC-37 proprietary?)
WORM Drive of some type (SCSI)
QIC-150 tape drive (SCSI)
Iomega 150 MultiDisk (SCSI)
Iomega 90 Pro (SCSI)
DAT of some type (SCSI)
Iomega Jaz (SCSI)
Iomega ZIP (IDE)
Conner 420 (floppy interface)
Colorado 250 (floppy interface)
Archive 4320NT DAT (SCSI)
Conner 700 (floppy interface)
Colorado T1000 (floppy)
SyQuest EZ135 (SCSI)
The trick now is to figure out what is downward compatible with what and
eliminate those drives. The Conner 700 is obviously compatible with the
420, the Colorado T4000 is probably downward compatible with the T1000,
the Iomega 150 is downward compatible with the 90, I think the Ditto drive
is basically the same as the Colorado Jumbo drives and the Conners, so I
would want to choose the one that is most downward compatible in terms of
maximum storage.
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).
Did the Bernoulli Box have a proprietary interface? If so, does anyone
have one they want to get rid of?
I would imagine I can hook as many of the floppy interface drives as I
need to a single cable, providing I can crimp on the proper connectors.
Will there be any issues with conflicts or power? I imagine as long as
I'm not using two drives on the same cable at a time then I should be
fine.
I think I have QIC-40/80 covered. My Tecmar QT-125e does QIC-2 up to
125MB, but from what I can tell from research that standard goes up to at
least 500MB. I'm still trying to figure out what QIC-1000 is.
Tecmar is still around (www.tecmar.com) but they only do Travan and DAT.
Their older products (QIC and 8MM) are obsolete and they don't have
drivers available.
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?
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
Festival
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com
*
14 Feb
14 Feb
4:50 a.m.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
A write-only device.
And just TRY to ask Iomega whether it can work with the Verbatim
extra-length Travan tapes!
Iomega ZIP (IDE)
available internal and
external, also in parallel, SCSI, and the "Zip
PLUS" is BOTH parallel and SCSI.
13 Feb
13 Feb
9:41 p.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
What's the purpose of a write-only backup device???
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
A write-only device. available internal and external, also in parallel,
SCSI, and the "Zip
PLUS" is BOTH parallel and SCSI.
I have a ZIP Plus but it's external and I'd like to try to keep everything
internal where possible.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
14 Feb
14 Feb
8:40 a.m.
I think he's expressing an opinion shared by many, though not by me. There's
reason to wonder, though.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sellam Ismail" <foo(a)siconic.com>
To: "Classic Computers Mailing List" <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:41 AM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
Festival
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Vintage Computer Festival
wrote:
What's the purpose of a write-only backup device???
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
A write-only device. available internal and external, also in
parallel, SCSI, and the "Zip
PLUS" is BOTH parallel and SCSI.
I have a ZIP Plus but it's external and I'd like to try to keep everything
internal where possible.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com
*
9:52 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Sellam Ismail wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
*Most* of Iomega's tape hardware has been write-only.
Doc
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Vintage Computer Festival
wrote:
What's the purpose of a write-only backup device??? Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
A write-only device.
8:35 a.m.
I've had better luck than you,apparently, with the DITTO Easy3200, though it's
too small and slow to be of use any longer.
It's just another IOMEGA boondoggle, though. I avoid any contact with IOMEGA
anymore, as not one of their products, and I have dozens, has ever lived up to
their widely publicized claims. They clearly lie about their device
characteristics, and freely admit it if pressed.
I wouldn't rely on them to tell me the truth about anything, including whether
a competitor's media will work.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Cisin (XenoSoft)" <cisin(a)xenosoft.com>
To: "Classic Computers Mailing List" <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
A write-only device.
And just TRY to ask Iomega whether it can work with the Verbatim
extra-length Travan tapes!
Iomega ZIP (IDE)
available internal and
external, also in parallel, SCSI, and the "Zip
PLUS" is BOTH parallel and SCSI.
9:10 a.m.
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Richard Erlacher wrote:
I've had better luck than you,apparently, with the
DITTO Easy3200, though it's
too small and slow to be of use any longer.
I would gladly send it to you, except for two things:
1) I no longer have it. I gave somebody who bought the tapes a
substantial discount on the tapes if they would take the drive away.
2) I do not hate you, or anyone else, that much.
It's just another IOMEGA boondoggle, though. I
avoid any contact with IOMEGA
anymore, as not one of their products, and I have dozens, has ever lived up to
their widely publicized claims. They clearly lie about their device
characteristics, and freely admit it if pressed.
I wouldn't rely on them to tell me the truth about anything, including whether
a competitor's media will work.
HOW can you ask them ANYTHING? Unless things have changed, neither their
telephone, nor wbesite can be used to ask any question!
There was once a class-action lawsuit over their "support"!
I've had better experiences than most people with their Zip drives, but
the Ditto 3200 is my nominee for worst ever product.
11:21 a.m.
Thanks, but I gave away my last one. I haven't had use for a device with such
small capacity for over a decade. I got this thing for a client but swapped
him an EXABYTE 8mm drive of 10GB capacity that cost more but hasn't caused me
any embarassment. The media cost difference warrants the switch from a $200
tape drive to a $2000 drive. The media for this pup cost about $40, for a
3.2GB with optimal compression, while the 112-meter 8mm cartridge which holds
about 5GB without compression, and 10 with, costs about $4 in q1.
I've had similarly poor performance and results overall with QIC drives, even
the 8GB types from Seagate, etc, but I'm NEVER planning to buy anything from
IOMEGA again. I've still got about 500 lbs of useless IOMEGA hardware in the
basement ...
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Cisin (XenoSoft)" <cisin(a)xenosoft.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: Drive inventory
IOMEGA
On Thu, 14 Feb 2002, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> I've had better luck than you,apparently, with the DITTO Easy3200, though
it's
too small and
slow to be of use any longer.
I would gladly send it to you, except for two things:
1) I no longer have it. I gave somebody who bought the tapes a
substantial discount on the tapes if they would take the drive away.
2) I do not hate you, or anyone else, that much.
> It's just another IOMEGA boondoggle, though. I avoid any contact with
> anymore, as not one of their products, and I have
dozens, has ever lived
up to
> their widely publicized claims. They clearly lie
about their device
> characteristics, and freely admit it if pressed.
> I wouldn't rely on them to tell me the truth about anything, including
whether
a
competitor's media will work.
HOW can you ask them ANYTHING? Unless things have changed, neither their
telephone, nor wbesite can be used to ask any question!
There was once a class-action lawsuit over their "support"!
I've had better experiences than most people with their Zip drives, but
the Ditto 3200 is my nominee for worst ever product.
7:31 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1657 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020214/71927233/at…
8351
days inactive
8352
days old
43 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
foo＠siconic.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
jrasite＠eoni.com -
pcw＠mesanet.com -
tothwolf＠concentric.net -
vaxman＠earthlink.net -
vcf＠vintage.org