On 8/7/06, Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) <JMARTI05 at intersil.com> wrote:
>
>
> Does anyone have any guidance on this issue or interaction with both types
> of drives?  We're looking into upgrading our aging quantum library here and
> trying to put together a business case for one over the other.  I like the
> 800GB per tape and higher transfer speeds of LTO3, but being an SDLT220 shop
> now, I'm keen on the SDLT 600 backwards compatibility.  I haven't priced
> tapes yet, but that could also be a determining factor.  Any real world
> horror stories or analysis anyone had done would be appreciated.  >From what
> I gather reading the list mostly everyone has gone LTO / I don't think I've
> seen SDLT 600 mentioned once!?
>
> -Jonathan

Why SDLT 600 and not DLT-S4?

DLT-S4 has capacity like LTO-4 (800GB native), speed near LTO-3 (~60
MB/sec native) and is priced better than LTO-2 (~$13/100GB vs.
~$18/100GB)!  Plus a DLT-S4 drive can read SDLT 220 tapes .

LTO was created as a balance against too much control over tape in
Quantum's hands.  Now IBM and HP basically control the LTO market and
the LTO market is quickly becoming the whole "super-tape" market.  I
think Quantum is trying to make up ground it lost over the last 5
years.

On the other hand, LTO-4 should be announced before the end of the
year.  That should bring down the cost of LTO-3 tapes a little.  LTO
tapes are also a little smaller.

Austin