Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!bath63!pes
From: pes@ux63.bath.ac.uk (Smee)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: IBM high dense (ity) drives
Message-ID: <1396@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 10-Jul-87 05:28:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: bath63.1396
Posted: Fri Jul 10 05:28:11 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jul-87 14:03:53 EDT
References: <12901@topaz.rutgers.edu> <1612@oliveb.UUCP> <1987Jun27.013207.9477@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> <1547@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Reply-To: pes@ux63.bath.ac.uk (Smee)
Organization: AUCC c/o University of Bath
Lines: 24


I'll go with Moshe on this.  If we took the original sender's 'leave it alone'
literally, we'd all still be using 1/8th meg 8-inch disks.  Historically,
'packing' media hasn't been too painful as long as the physical characteristics
of the media stay the same.  800/1600/6250 bpi tape drives are quite common.
Drives which will read 80-track 5.25 or 3.00 inch disks will also handle
40-track ones.  And, a proper QUAD-density 3.5 drive should do the right
thing to current DD disks.  (And, of course, a DS drive can use SS disks.)

The only real disadvantage is that you must assume the lowest common
denominator when interchanging or distributing disks (SS-DD for 3.5 drives).
Our experience is that most disks stay with the one machine they were
created on, which means that the new QD wins big in saving local stoarge,
the cost being that you've got to remember to keep some DD's around for
transporting data.

Far as costs go, sounds like I should come to the States to buy my disks.
Going price over here (for quality Branded disks) is (in packs of 10) about
6 dollars each for DS, little under 4 dollars for SS.  Sigh...

(Cameras and computers, my 2 hobbies, are distributed without regard for
exchange rates, is my guess.  In general, any given item for either costs
the same IN NUMBERS in the US and the UK, which means, at current exchange
rates, the UK price is about 1.6 times the US one.)