|
|
Posted by Jan Panteltje on 07/17/07 15:29
On a sunny day (Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:09:11 +0200) it happened Martin Heffels
<goofies@flikken.net> wrote in <limp93dfaj1upqb9qgq79j8223ojbk55fg@4ax.com>:
>On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:19:20 GMT, Jan Panteltje
><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On a sunny day (Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:01:44 +0200) it happened Martin Heffels
>><goofies@flikken.net> wrote in <2iqn935urjksoqchqiglg7n8opvas9qd9l@4ax.com>:
>>
>>>On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:13:15 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>><pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>When the tape moves faster, and the minimum bit distance is the same,
>>>>then you get a higher data rate (bits per second), so better quality,
>>>>FOR THE SAME RELIABILITY.
>>>
>>>Wrong conclusion: you get a higher reliabilty,
>>
>>Oh no, the 'reliability' is set by how close the magnetisation areas
>>are together.
>>Noise being the culprit, if too close.
>
>Sorry, but in relation to DV25 (what we were talking about), this is
>wrong.
You are right about that.
But here I was referring to magnetic recording in general.
The hurdle the harddisk manufacturers - and probably tape makers -
face is how to get more bits per square inch.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|