Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site sunybcs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!rocksvax!sunybcs!ugthomas From: ugthomas@sunybcs.UUCP ( Timothy Thomas) Newsgroups: net.micro Subject: Re: Re: using both side of disks Message-ID: <1921@sunybcs.UUCP> Date: Sun, 14-Jul-85 10:45:29 EDT Article-I.D.: sunybcs.1921 Posted: Sun Jul 14 10:45:29 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 04:38:59 EDT References: <11474@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1631@ecsvax.UUCP> Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science Lines: 22 > > . . . Therefore, most single-sided > > disks have *known* defects on the uncertified side (you can tell which > > side is the correct side because it has the label on it). I have well over 200 SS/SD disks that I have been using for about 3 years on both sides. I have had relatively few problems (probably about 5 disks out of all of them have failed, and only when the disk was being written for the first time, so no info was lost). The only difference between SS and DS are that the DS are *certified* to be used on both sides. True the disk is not meant to be spinned backwards, but for the savings in money (let alone storage space) I think it is worth it. -- ____________ ____/--\____ \______ ___) ( _ ____) "Damn it Jim!, __| |____/ / `--' I'm a programmer not a Doctor!" ) `|=(- \------------' Timothy D. Thomas SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science UUCP: [decvax,dual,rocksanne,watmath,rocksvax]!sunybcs!ugthomas CSnet: ugthomas@buffalo, ARPAnet: ugthomas%buffalo@CSNET-RELAY