From owner-freebsd-hardware  Sat Aug 30 21:39:15 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hardware>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA18665
          for hardware-outgoing; Sat, 30 Aug 1997 21:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (ppp20.portal.net.au [202.12.71.120])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA18643;
          Sat, 30 Aug 1997 21:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost.smith.net.au [127.0.0.1])
	by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA01253;
	Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:07:39 +0930 (CST)
Message-Id: <199708310437.OAA01253@word.smith.net.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
cc: freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Is this (SCSI) tape drive compatible with FreeBSD? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:02:46 +0930."
             <19970831140246.12132@lemis.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:07:37 +0930
From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> On Sun, Aug 31, 1997 at 01:37:47PM +0930, Mike Smith wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> > I wasn't comparing them to a 1/2" transport, but rather to a 4mm or 8mm
> > mechanism.  You will note that, in fact, I specifically mentioned that
> > the only commercially active 1/2" transport currently on the market
> > (DLT) was probably *more* robust.
> 
> DLT is 1/2"?  News to me.  And certainly DLT isn't what people think
> of when you talk 1/2" tape.

*chuckle*  DLT is a direct descendant of the venerable TK-50.  Take a 
look at one sometime.  8)

> Greg

mike