On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:15:42 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 12/04/2011 10:28 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:17:28 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/04/2011 6:29 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>> It's news to me that DAT was ever intended as anything other than a
>>>>>>   studio format.
>>>> That's why it sucks so hard as a backup medium - it was only intended
>>>> to be used for lossy data (ie, audio), and was adapted for use for
>>>> backup medium.
>>>
>>> Are you sure about that, Jim?
>>> I seem to remember that in the mid 70s I used DAT tape to load
>>> programmes and data into a Burroughs mini computer.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure about that.  "Digital Audio Tape" is what DAT stands
>> for.
>>
>>
> Well they were not called DAT but they were in the same casing and had
> similar lengths. They did have a small hole punched near to the ends of
> the tape and a light sensor to stop the tape running off the spindle.

Yeah, that's different than what I'm talking about - DDS-2 (for example) 
didn't come out until the 90's IIRC.

>> You aren't thinking about standard cassettes?  I used to use those on
>> Commodore PET and C64 computers, and they also had occasional issues
>> with data loss.
>>
>>
> 
> Never had one of those.

I had a C64, but the PET was a business computer back in the 80's.  We 
had those at school.

Jim

Post a reply to this message