Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA From: SHahn@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Newsgroups: net.micro.cpm Subject: Re: Disk Controller Recommendations? Message-ID: <17497@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Tue, 13-Mar-84 12:30:14 EST Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.17497 Posted: Tue Mar 13 12:30:14 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 16-Mar-84 02:54:34 EST Lines: 27 From: Sam HahnI ran a similar system for 2+ years. I give unqualified recommendations on SD Systems boards for reliability and functionality. They have never ever given me so much as a glitch, even when I've moved from place to place. HOWEVER! There are a few things to think about. The VfyII I got in Dec '81 was part of their SBC-200,ExpIII,etc board set, which does not strictly conform to 696 standards. That's one problem (though I could run any number of boards I wanted to run with little problem, including SSM I/O, Heuristics Speechlab, MD MultI/O, a QT clock, and more). The new boards that SD is advertising DOES conform to 696, however, so that's a step in the right direction. Another problem is that the formats understood by the VfyII and supported by SD Systems are not widely used. Practically the only way I could move files from my SD higher density disks onto my new Compupro system was to do a copy from the orig's to SSSD 8", and then read that standard format. A pain for 100+ disks, not to mention what you have to go through if you have more. These two problems are the only reservations I have about the VFYII, and their impact on your application is not for me to decide. Suffice to say that if I hadn't made the move to Compupro, I'd have little to complain about: deviations from 696 haven't affected me at all. -- sam hahn [shahn@sumex] -------