Edward, I wouldn't say far more expensive, but in terms of TCO, SATA DISK is quite competitive with Tape, with all the value added DASD stuff like Remote Copy, FCV1 and FCV2, Zero Mount-Position-Rewind time, PAV, multi-user file access, etc.
Come to think of it, I would much rather DEFRAG a disk based ML2 volume with FCV2 than recycle Tape based ML2 volume :) Ron > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Edward E. Jaffe > Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2006 7:25 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Tape is Far More Expensive the DASD? (Was: State of the Mainframe > - News Article) > > Hal Merritt wrote: > > Hardware costs have been plummeting for a while now. So much so that it > > makes a serious difference in how we manage resources. We now consider > > tape to be far more expensive than DASD. YMMV. > > > > Tape far more expensive than DASD? I find this difficult to believe. > Could you elaborate? > > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > | Edward E. Jaffe | | > | Mgr, Research & Development | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | > | Phoenix Software International | Tel: (310) 338-0400 x318 | > | 5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800 | Fax: (310) 338-0801 | > | Los Angeles, CA 90045 | http://www.phoenixsoftware.com | > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
