Re: DDS-3 vs DDS-4?

2000-08-02 Thread Xavier HUMBERT - Labo Informatique

Le 01/08/2000 a 11:32 -0400 , Steve Rothman ecrivait :

 LaCie DDS-3 from MacWarehouse costs about $800 compared to $1150 for
DDS-4.

I'm using the very same drive, with no problem *at all* . Can't say the
same for DDS2 or worst, Travan Drives !

-- 
Xavier HUMBERT  -  Systemes et Reseaux | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
INJEP  | [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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




Re: DDS-3 vs DDS-4?

2000-08-02 Thread Jon Gardner

on 8/1/2000 10:32 AM, Steve Rothman at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 (The only single-tape solution
 in my price range is VXA, which sounds very nice, but there is NO WAY
 I will go with a new, single-vendor solution...)

You really have to look at risk vs. cost in this case. You can get into a
VXA drive with a few tapes for $600-$700 and have an immediate 33-66Gb
single-tape backup capacity. You'll pay about twice that much for a DDS
equivalent, and more for anything else.


Jon L. Gardner '89, Computer Systems Manager mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Texas AM University Dept. of Food Services http://food.tamu.edu/
Tel 979.458.1839 * Fax 979.845.2157 * Hip 979.229.4323
PGP public key available at http://food.tamu.edu/pgp/jon.html

Statistical observation:
In 1998, 121 children under the age of 15 died in gun-related accidents.
In 1998, 181 children under the age of 15 died in bicycling accidents.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvs48_11.pdf





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




Re: DDS-3 vs DDS-4?

2000-08-01 Thread Don Foy

on 8/1/00 9:32 AM, Steve Rothman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 In terms of reliability, is DDS-3 more like DDS-2 or DDS-4?

I'm using the DDS-3 LaCie drive you are looking at. It has been pretty good.
It had to go back because of some SCSI voodoo, but the tape portion of the
drive has been spotless.
===
Don Foy  Herald-Citizen
Webmaster and Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.herald-citizen.com
Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===



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




Re: DDS-3 vs DDS-4?

2000-08-01 Thread Philip Chonacky

I am using a Sony DDS-3 autochanger (8 tapes) which cost us ~$2300 in June of '99.
So far it has been exponentially better than the HP DDS-2 it was replacing.


I had thought I had decided on getting DDS-4 but now am considering 
DDS-3 in its place, for use with a Retrospect backup of mostly Mac 
clients and a few PCs.

My previous experience with DDS-2 was very unhappy -- too much 
maintenance, too much downtime, too many ever-changing 
recommendations about what brand of media to use, etc.

I have been assured by several DDS-4 users on this list (thanks!) 
that DDS-4 is much more reliable and easy to deal with.

However, I'm now thinking about going DDS-3 instead. I can't do a 
full backup of my environment with a single DDS-4 tape anyway (it 
would take two) and with DDS-3 it would take three, so either way I 
will have to deal with multiple tapes. (The only single-tape solution 
in my price range is VXA, which sounds very nice, but there is NO WAY 
I will go with a new, single-vendor solution...)

LaCie DDS-3 from MacWarehouse costs about $800 compared to $1150 for DDS-4.

DDS-3 media seems to cost about half as much as DDS-4 media, even 
though it holds more than half as much data. (12GB vs 20GB)

When I look at the prices of the drives and media, it appears that I 
would save a considerable amount of money by using DDS-3 instead of 
DDS-4.

Cost and day-to-day reliability are very important to me. Also 
crucial is future support (2 - 4 years down the road) for drive 
repairs and availability of media.

Speed, dealing with a few extra tape cartridges, and the ability to 
read anyone else's DDS-4 tape are NOT important to me.

Can anyone think of a reason why I should get a DDS-4 instead of a 
DDS-3, given these conditions?

In terms of reliability, is DDS-3 more like DDS-2 or DDS-4?

Thanks for your advice. -Steve


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


___
Philip Chonacky, IS Manager
Barrett Companies
ph. (617) 577-9500
fx. (617) 577-1010
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




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




Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-08 Thread Serge Paulus

Ever tried DLT tapes? it's expensive but I NEVER had a damaged tape in 5 years. On the 
contrary, ± 50 DAT tapes (120m) are damaged (after incremental backups, never reusing 
a tape) in my archives of ±250 tapes...

-- 
Serge Paulus
Helpdesk
Microscript s.a.
51 rue du Poinçon
B-1000 Brussels
322/213.00.96



On mardi 7 mars 2000, Robin Bateman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All

Don't want to be too contentious but Tape is NOT a good medium
for archiving

see note below for reason why

CD is much better

Also has the benefit that all Macs (OK OK Unless v old!)  most peecees have
CD so v easy for users to get archived data back

ie: no dat drive (etc) no multi copies of retrospect (
training etc)

Just a thought. Over to you






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



RE: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-08 Thread O'Donnell, Dan (NBC)

In as many years I've had about 10 tapes either go bad and take down the DLT
drives, or perhaps the drives damaged the tapes that were in them at the
time they went down. It's hard to tell which went first. At any rate, DLT is
not bulletproof, and nor is it inexpensive to repair.

However, after several very expensive repairs (in which the repair company
could not or would not salvage the tapes), we decided to try repairing the
drives ourselves. It is a fairly simple process of opening the case and
nudging the mechanism so that it releases the tape which will then rewind
back into the cartridge and can be reused. This is certainly not something
you would want to try if you're not comfortable tinkering with mechanisms,
but the simplicity of the DLT and a willingness to experiment might save you
several hundred of your local currency units.

Daniel O'Donnell
NBC 2000
3000 W. Alameda Ave.
Burbank CA 91523
818.840.6610 (voice)
818.840.3390 (fax)


 -Original Message-
 From: Serge Paulus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 1:59 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?
 
 
 Ever tried DLT tapes? it's expensive but I NEVER had a 
 damaged tape in 5 years. On the contrary, ? 50 DAT tapes 
 (120m) are damaged (after incremental backups, never reusing 
 a tape) in my archives of ?250 tapes...
 
 -- 
 Serge Paulus
 Helpdesk
 Microscript s.a.
 51 rue du Poincon
 B-1000 Brussels
 322/213.00.96
 
 
 
 On mardi 7 mars 2000, Robin Bateman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi All
 
 Don't want to be too contentious but Tape is NOT a good medium
 for archiving
 
 see note below for reason why
 
 CD is much better
 
 Also has the benefit that all Macs (OK OK Unless v old!)  
 most peecees have
 CD so v easy for users to get archived data back
 
 ie: no dat drive (etc) no multi copies of retrospect (
 training etc)
 
 Just a thought. Over to you
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 --
 To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/
 Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.


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



Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-08 Thread SK Suh

At 10:58 AM +0100 03/08/2000, Serge Paulus wrote:
Ever tried DLT tapes? it's expensive but I NEVER had a damaged tape 
in 5 years. On the contrary, ± 50 DAT tapes (120m) are damaged 
(after incremental backups, never reusing a tape) in my archives of 
±250 tapes...

Thanks for all of the responses to date on this thread.

The purpose of my original post wasn't to discuss alternatives to DAT 
such as DLT, AIT, CD-R or VXA. We like DAT, we use DAT and have no 
plans to discontinue the use of DAT as relatively low-cost archiving 
of completed digital prepress jobs. Crucial data is sometimes written 
to other media, but DAT has been our primary archival media since 
1993 (with very few mishaps).

While appreciating the advantages of AIT (and DLT) for high capacity 
server backup functions, these newer tape systems aren't ideal for 
maintaining some backwards compatibility with 60- and 90-metre DAT 
media from the last half decade.

It therefore seems that DDS-4 is the way to go, at least for our requirements.

Stephen K. Suh


Network RD + Admin Tel 613/228-0250
Studio Colour Group Fax 613/228-0254
6 Gurdwara Rd., Suite 105
Nepean, ON K2E 8A3 Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-07 Thread andrew

Have verified those archives recently? I've found that many of my DDS-2
archives from three years ago, on Sony, Maxell, Verbatim, and Fuji tapes,
have become unreadable.
- Original Message -
From: "SK Suh" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2000 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?


 At 8:35 PM -0800 03/06/2000, Chuck Hornish wrote:
 I'd suggest getting rid of the 60-Meter tapes and re-writing the
 data onto longer tapes. Are you keeping the catalogs as well as the
 tapes? Are these tapes archives or backups?

 We would hopefully be keeping old catalogs and 60/90 metre tapes, as
 they're completed (archived) jobs from years gone by.

 There's no need to write to the ancient 60 metre tapes, but being
 able to write to the 90 metre tapes would be an asset.

 Stephen K. Suh

 
 Network RD + Admin Tel 613/228-0250
 Studio Colour Group Fax 613/228-0254
 6 Gurdwara Rd., Suite 105
 Nepean, ON K2E 8A3 Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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




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



Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-07 Thread Robin Bateman

Hi All

Don't want to be too contentious but Tape is NOT a good medium for archiving

see note below for reason why

CD is much better

Also has the benefit that all Macs (OK OK Unless v old!)  most peecees have
CD so v easy for users to get archived data back

ie: no dat drive (etc) no multi copies of retrospect ( training etc)

Just a thought. Over to you


R



   ,,,
  /'^'\
 ( o o )
-oOOO--(_)--OOOo

   Robin Bateman
   Topology UK LtdTel: +44 (1494) 539991
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   Fax: +44 (1494) 539992
   www.topology.co.uk

 .oooO
 (   )   Oooo.
--\ ((   )--
   \_)) /
 (_/


 From: "andrew" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Organization: ardent micro
 Reply-To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 09:20:52 -0500
 To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?
 
 Have verified those archives recently? I've found that many of my DDS-2
 archives from three years ago, on Sony, Maxell, Verbatim, and Fuji tapes,
 have become unreadable.
 - Original Message -
 From: "SK Suh" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: "retro-talk" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, March 06, 2000 11:41 PM
 Subject: Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?
 
 
 At 8:35 PM -0800 03/06/2000, Chuck Hornish wrote:
 I'd suggest getting rid of the 60-Meter tapes and re-writing the
 data onto longer tapes. Are you keeping the catalogs as well as the
 tapes? Are these tapes archives or backups?
 
 We would hopefully be keeping old catalogs and 60/90 metre tapes, as
 they're completed (archived) jobs from years gone by.
 
 There's no need to write to the ancient 60 metre tapes, but being
 able to write to the 90 metre tapes would be an asset.
 
 Stephen K. Suh
 
 
 Network RD + Admin Tel 613/228-0250
 Studio Colour Group Fax 613/228-0254
 6 Gurdwara Rd., Suite 105
 Nepean, ON K2E 8A3 Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 --
 --
 To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/
 Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 
 --
 --
 To subscribe:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Archives:http://list.working-dogs.com/lists/retro-talk/
 Problems?:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 




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



Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-07 Thread SK Suh

At 10:18 PM -0800 03/06/2000, Chuck Hornish wrote:
We have a Sony DDS-4 which can write to 90-meter tapes, but not the
60-meter variety.

Thanks for the enlightening info, Chuck!

Will DDS-4 at least read the older 60 metre DAT media?

Stephen K. Suh


Network RD + Admin Tel 613/228-0250
Studio Colour Group Fax 613/228-0254
6 Gurdwara Rd., Suite 105
Nepean, ON K2E 8A3 Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-06 Thread Chuck Hornish

SK Suh wrote:
 
 Am shopping for a DAT drive replacement for our aging Dynatek DDS-1
 (or -2?) unit for archival use. This DAT would be attached to an
 older beige Power Macintosh G3 and would be writing data from a local
 hard drive, not over the network.
 
 Ideally I'd like to be able to utilize newer, faster and
 higher-capacity media while retaining backwards read/write capability
 with our massive library of 60 and 90 metre DAT media.
 
 Would DDS-4 be worthwhile despite the price, higher media costs and
 limited backwards compatibility, especially given its improved
 performance? Otherwise, would it make more sense to consider a proven
 DDS-3 solution?

DDS-4. I'd suggest getting rid of the 60-Meter tapes and re-writing the
data onto longer tapes. Are you keeping the catalogs as well as the
tapes? Are these tapes archives or backups?

-- 
Best Regards,

Chuck Hornish, KF6YBC
Narnia Information Systems, Inc.
Fountain Valley, California 92708 USA

Voice: 714-963-7742  FAX: 714-593-5808

mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Delivering precisely defined database solutions since 1992.


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



Re: DDS-3 or DDS-4?

2000-03-06 Thread SK Suh

At 8:35 PM -0800 03/06/2000, Chuck Hornish wrote:
I'd suggest getting rid of the 60-Meter tapes and re-writing the
data onto longer tapes. Are you keeping the catalogs as well as the
tapes? Are these tapes archives or backups?

We would hopefully be keeping old catalogs and 60/90 metre tapes, as 
they're completed (archived) jobs from years gone by.

There's no need to write to the ancient 60 metre tapes, but being 
able to write to the 90 metre tapes would be an asset.

Stephen K. Suh


Network RD + Admin Tel 613/228-0250
Studio Colour Group Fax 613/228-0254
6 Gurdwara Rd., Suite 105
Nepean, ON K2E 8A3 Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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