From owner-freebsd-scsi  Sat Aug 30 19:16:43 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-scsi>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA13071
          for freebsd-scsi-outgoing; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns.feral.com (root@feral.mauswerks.net [204.152.96.10])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA13066;
          Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:16:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from feral.feral.com.feral.COM (feral [192.67.166.5])
	by ns.feral.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id TAA00598;
	Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:11:57 -0700
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 19:11:57 -0700
From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com>
Message-Id: <199708310211.TAA00598@ns.feral.com>
To: mike@smith.net.au
Subject: Re: Is this (SCSI) tape drive compatible with FreeBSD?
Cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG,
        richard@pegasus.com
reply-to: mjacob@feral.com
Sender: owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


 >>  >A 250meg capacity is awfully small today, and the tapes are too expensive.
>> >They're also excruciatingly slow.
>> 
>> This isn't even 250Meg. It's QIC-120 (120Meg) or QIC-150.
>> 
>
>The Viper 150 will happily read and write the 250 and 525MB 
>extended-length tapes.
>

Very interesting. This wasn't qualified by Sun, that I recall.
I'd check to see whether it's a 2150S or a 2150.

The drives aren't *that* robust- I'd say an old 9 track is
more robust, mechanical, not vacuum. It's data density is very low though.