|
|
Posted by Steve King on 07/11/06 20:51
"Martin Heffels" <youwishyouwouldknow@nottellinya.com> wrote in message
news:f6t7b2tp6m5p94krn110c323urf9n7nf24@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 11:22:39 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
> <richard.7.crowley@intel.com> wrote:
>
>>"Steve King" wrote ...
>>
>>> Oh, and is computer tape as used in backing up the most valuable data
>>> on
>>> the planet different from DV tape? Or, are we really interested any
>>> more?
>>> ;-)
>>
>>The physical tape may be exactly the same. But, how the data is
>>handled on the tape (and how much raw capacity is devoted to
>>ECC) is different depending on the application (hard data vs.
>>audio/video data).
>
> Maybe y'all have heard about this project, maybe not. A few years ago
> there
> was somebody who came up with the idea to use mini-DV as back-up medium
> for
> computer-data, because of the transfer-speed. After research they
> realiseed
> that for computer-data the bit-error-rate was too high on mini-DV tape, to
> make safe back-ups. With an enormous amount of error-correction data
> added,
> it was to do, but then the extra data overhead didn't really make it worth
> anymore to making a back-up on a slower medium.
>
> cheers
>
> -martin-
I hadn't read that. So, where did the difference lie between mini-DV and
typical tape-backup hardware do you think? In the tape formulations? In
the way the ones and zeros are put on the tape? On the tape speed? On the
way the head scans the tape? Something else?
Steve King
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|