M2 is definitely the drive to beat if you're looking for speed/capacity
(12MB/s native speed, 60GB uncompressed capacity).  I have seen
11.8MB/second with Macs and Retrospect in the field.

VXA does 3MB/second.  It's a great drive for its class.  Native capacity for
VXA is 33GB.

The M2 is definitely more expensive for the drive mechanism, but the tapes
are a lot more cost effective.

It takes two VXA tapes to equal one M2 tape (approximately).  Two VXA tapes
will cost between $160-170.  One M2 tape is $95.00 (tape prices vary
depending on source).  If you use enough tapes, you can easily justify M2
because of the saved money in media over the lifetime of the drive.

Steve
www.cybernetics.com


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Larry Acosta Wong
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2000 10:55 AM
To: retro-talk
Subject: Re: Finally - a cure for DLT


How's performance? The reliability of the tapes is impressive but I'm
concerned about the drive's backup performance. Take a look at PC
Mag's article on tape drives:
<http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/stories/reviews/0,6755,2461114,00.html>.
The VXA-1 was pretty much the slowest drive. The fastest drive was
the Exabyte Mammoth-2.

At 9:52 AM -0400 4/10/00, Luke Jaeger wrote:
>Just wanted to broadcast my opinion that Ecrix VXA rocks. I'm evaluating
>one and it's highly impressive.
>--
>
>
>top of the world,
>
>Luke Jaeger, Technology Coordinator
>Disney Magazine Publishing
>Northampton, Massachusetts
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Any opinions expressed in this message are my own and may not represent
>the opinions of Disney Publishing, etc etc etc.
>



--
----------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives:        <http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/>
Problems?:       [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to