Re: Alternative backup devices for UNIX VaxStation 2000's

Article View: comp.sys.dec

Article #4925

#4925

From: G.Pavlov
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 1988 03:32

11 lines
1004 bytes

In article <4044@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>, sparks@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Steve Gaarder) writes:
> 
> Worse than that, TK50's are extremely unreliable. 

  I am not exactly fond of DEC (and less fond of it as time passes) but I do
  wonder how true this statement is anymore. Slow, yes, media overpriced, yes,
  hard to figure out at times, yes.  But "extremely unreliable" ?  Our own ex-
  perience with heavy use of two of these for the past 20 months has been good,  
 from the perspective of reliability

  greg pavlov, fstrf, amherst, ny

Technical Details

Message-ID: <538@hscfvax.harvard.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hscfvax!pavlov

References: <1073@ndmath.UUCP> <4044@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hscfvax!pavlov
From: pavlov@hscfvax.harvard.edu (G.Pavlov)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Alternative backup devices for UNIX VaxStation 2000's
Message-ID: <538@hscfvax.harvard.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 88 03:32:35 GMT
References: <1073@ndmath.UUCP> <4044@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Organization: Health Sciences Computing Facility, Harvard University
Lines: 11

Reply to Parent Message