RE: Question on Tape Drive Replacement -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: RE: Question on Tape Drive Replacement
From: "Chuck Lewis" <clewis@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 08:06:13 -0500
Importance: Normal
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l>,<mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l>,<mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

That so you mean Rob ? That even though the 3581 is fast, the 3590 kicks
it's butt ?

From: Rob on Monday, August 19, 2002 2:58 PM
To: midrange-l@midrange.com
Subject: Re: Question on Tape Drive Replacement

We are finding that the 3581 is the winner in the volume of data per tape.
 However, for our time critical stuff we still use the 3590's.

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

RE: Question on Tape Drive Replacement , Andy Nolen-Parkhouse

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.