Comments on “HP and Sony double team better storage tape format” • The Register

Comments on: HP and Sony double team better storage tape format

Back to the article
Comments on this article are now closed

320GB on DAT - No thanks. #

By Michael Duke Posted Wednesday 16th July 2008 03:26 GMT

I am not sure about the rest of the industry but I would not be comftorable with 320GB of my data on a DAT tape. 12/24 was bad enough, but 160/320 is just silly on the 4mm format.

Paris because she is also thin and unreliable.

Small dusinesses can't afford to loose their DATA #

By Trygve Henriksen Posted Wednesday 16th July 2008 06:32 GMT

Which is why they should stay the F! away from DAT...

I'd sooner use an old Iomega Ditto 800 hooked up to the floppy controller to do my backups than use DAT.

Er... Even DAT 160 is an 8mm format #

By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 16th July 2008 09:12 GMT

And likewise for DAT 320.

Why not just buy a bluray burner and a couple 50GB BD-REs? #

By Kamilion Schnook of Second Life Posted Wednesday 16th July 2008 17:39 GMT

I would figure a bluray burner would have better data retention capability due to the hard coating on the disc, as well as having a longer shelf life, resistance to magnetics (Ever have some jackoff with a bulk tape eraser wipe the wrong tape?) and more compatibility with restoring the backed up data. After all, anyone can pick up a bluray reader for $150 and a burner for $300. Plus with the death of HD-DVD, it's likely going to be integrated into most PCs anyway, as it's currently the only large-capacity optical storage solution left. Plus you can pick up 25GB BD-REs for $15ish and the 50GBs for about $40. But the prices will drop within a year, and the capacity will rise, as Hitachi releases it's 100GB four layer discs, TDK' working experimental discs capable of holding 200 GB using six 33 GB data layers and Ritek already demonstrated up to 10 25GB layers in a disc for 250GB of storage...

Mine's the one with the pockets full of 50GB BD-REs.

Umm...no #

By Ben Parker Posted Friday 18th July 2008 12:57 GMT

Sorry...but I don't really see bluray's working out too well either, we run a daily differential backups by thusday the backup takes about 160GB which would require me to change the cd 3 times. I have seen the night time cleaning crew, I don't think I will be training them anytime soon how to change cd's when they are full.

360GB for $36 or LTO3's 400/800 for $30 let me think????

But my favorite part of this article is twice the capacity for half the speed? So if I have a DAT160 and my backup grows to 161GB great I just get a new drive and some new tapes and I am backwards compatible life is good...oh wait 161gb backup takes twice as long now that sucks.

Thanks HP and Sony your the best!!!