🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <76000361@p.cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
> 
> Actually, there was some traffic a few months ago about the CMS-60
> drives.  It seems the drive is a bad design, or comes from an overly
> cheap disk maker, so I would suggest --
> 
>   Don't Buy a CMS-60 disk drive!!!!

On what basis are you making this claim?  Do you (or anyone out there)
have some statistics about CMS drives?  Like percentage of failure?
And is it CMS that is failing, or Seagate?  I'd really like to know!

I have had a CMS-60 for over 7 months now without a hitch.  I would
buy another one if I needed one!  HOWEVER, the first drive that was
sent to me was DOA.  I was sent another one, and received within a
week.  The internal mechanism of the CMS-60 is a Seagate 277N, which
was the faulty part of my drive, but I felt that I was just unlucky.
Chris Schanzle (chris@umbc3.umbc.edu) also has one of these drives,
and hasn't had any trouble either.  (We bought our drives at the same
time.)  I'll be sure to let you all know what happens to the drives -
the day after the warranty expires.  :-)

> I have a warm spot in my heart for CMS since their drive saved me $200
> when everyone else (Jasmine) was charging highway-robbery prices for
> an 80 megabyte drive....

Me too.  Don't be afraid of CMS.

Disclaimer:  I have nothing to do with CMS, except I own a working CMS-60.
-- 
"...and this thing you call language - you depend on it for so much,
 yet none of you are its master."  		-Carlos the Medusan

Scott Paisley        paisley@cme.nbs.gov        ..!uunet!cme-durer!paisley