Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 30 Dec 1996 14:48:48 +0100 (MET)
From:      grog@lemis.de
To:        aat81@dial.pipex.com (Simon Reading)
Cc:        freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD hardware Users)
Subject:   Re: DAT reliability
Message-ID:  <199612301348.OAA02928@freebie.lemis.de>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19961230125151.0068a21c@pop.dial.pipex.com> from Simon Reading at "Dec 30, 96 12:53:06 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Simon Reading writes:
> At 12:59 30/12/96 +1030, Michael Smith wrote:
>> Simon Reading stands accused of saying:
>>  The SDT-7000, as has been observed, has a completely
>> different head assembly design.  The transport, insofar as any
>> helical-scan transport can be, is pretty good.  You can whine all you
>> like about consumer-grade product, but TBH your average consumer-grade
>> transport is pretty bloody good.  Sony are going to hurt a lot more
>> with 5% returns on a consumer product than on a computer product.
>
> 1. As you say, the SDT-7000 is a new design. Like ANY new product, I would
> expect more teething troubles than one which has been out in the market for
> longer. (NB. I'm not saying this was the cause of my problems).

I don't think that *any* is valid.  Many new products have teething
troubles; many others don't.  During this discussion I have come to
the conclusion that the HP C1533A is a whole lot more reliable than
the 35480A, for example.

> 3. How many people listen to their DAT player four hours _every day_?  How
> long would it last if they did?

I listen to my CD player for hours every day.  It's about 7 years old
now.  I don't have a DAT player, but I would guess that the typical
duty cycle for hi fi equipment could be higher than for tape backup
devices.

>>   I would guess that the 5200 has been
>>  out for longer and that any bugs/problems would be more likely to be
>>  observed/sorted out than any with the 7000.  The small price difference
>>  between the two models make me think that there has been little change in
>>  the funamental mechanism design and that 8000rpm may be too fast to
>>  transport the tape using the existing mechanism.
>>
>> The price of the unit has little or nothing to do with its cost,
>> design or taste when deep-fried.  I've observed over the last few
>> years that as a general rule, most DAT units "just work".  I've only
>> met a few "persistent plaintifs" who seem never to be able to get a
>> working unit.
>
> There are two separate issues here.
> 1. Infant mortality.  The reason why I returned my SDT-7000 was because it
> didn't work.  

Agreed.  But there was evidence in your case that the device had
already been installed somewhere and returned for some reason.

> The reason why I have not exchanged for another SDT-7000, is in case
> it is a problem with the batch.  (I can't afford to waste time with
> another dud).  Fait accompli.

You're assuming that you would be better off with another brand.  I
don't think that these problems extend to whole batches.

> 2. Expected Lifetime. As stated before, I'm much more interested in how
> long I could expect a DDS-2 to last.  From correspondence I've received I'd
> guess 18 months+ light usage, six months or so heavy usage (I'm happy to be
> corrected on this).

I suspect you're (mis)quoting me here.  I was talking about the 35480A
when I mentioned 6 months.  I'm pretty sure I've had the C1533 for
well over a year, and it has had well beyond the expected 12% duty
cycle in that time.

> Does one DDS-2 manufacturer produce more reliable drives than
> another?  I don't think we're much closer to an answer on this
> question.

There are bound to be differences in reliability.  It's just the
question whether they are statistically relevant.  My feeling is that
the technology has matured considerably in the last 5 years, and that
it will continue to mature.  As a result, I would prefer a new model
over an old model, even if other factors (capacity, speed) remain the
same.

Greg




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612301348.OAA02928>