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