🚀 go-pugleaf

In <43icop$1qf@maureen.teleport.com> Ken Brown <ken@pine-creek-sw.com>
writes: 
>
>Ken Brown <ken@pine-creek-sw.com> wrote:
>
>> PS - You're right.  I just looked at Apex' spec, and see that the
seek time
>> given is 1/3 stroke (19ms).  I - being the naive consumer that I am
- just
>> assumed that that must be how all specs are given.  So how does this
compare
>> to Jaz' seek time of ~11ms?  (Do I have to multiply x3?  Then my
decision is
>> done; forget Apex!)
>> 
>
>Yeah, and Ken Brown should've been paying more attention.  Sorry 'bout
that.
>
>Apparently, Pinnacle Micro has realized the error of their ways (as I
have!),
>and now quote seek time for 1/3 stroke.  Don't know what this means,
but
>I'm assuming (again!) that this, then, is the standard measure, and I
can
>compare this number (FWIW) to ~11ms for Jaz, and ~8ms for my HD.
>
>Ken

Ken,
   Don't assume this can be compared to anything else.  That is the
problem in this industry.  (Sorry if I sound negative, but this is just
past experience)  There is a difference for example, between an average
1/3 stroke seek and a seek over 1/3 of total stroke.  I have been out
of the loop for awhile, so some of the new drives out may have better
performance, i.e. they may have faster transfer rates than the drives I
was involved with,  but I have a hard time believing that the seek
times are the same or faster, since I know what it takes to get a 5.25"
optical to seek in 19mS. If you want the straight story, HP (if they
are still in the optical business) and Maxoptix do not mislead about
performance specs.  If you call one of these companies and ask for real
benchmark data, they will give you a straight story.  Probably most of
the other manufacturers will too. 
                                       Good luck.
                                                  John