We decided to go with DLTs because the 3590s were very expensive for the
capacity they delivered. In addition, DLT6000s are tentatively scheduled for
release in April, will double the capacity, and bring the performance to 5Mb/s.
This eliminates most of the advantages of the 3590 technology, especially when
price is factored in. In addition IBM has had trouble delivering the 3590 drives
and the tapes are very expensive. Also, don?t expect to see any significant
improvements in data capacity on the 3590s in the short term.

Get a DLT library on evaluation and try it. Nothing works better than first hand
experience.

Another option, if you need high performance and high capacity, and have the
monery, are the STK silos with Redwood drives.

Paul Shields
pshields AT bnr DOT ca

In message "DLT or 3590....", ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT edu writes:

>Hi,
>     Looks like I'm going to have to move ADSM from MVS to an AIX platform.
> When looking at what tape technologies to use, I narrowed down my choices
>to 3490E, 3590, and DLT.   I'm very familiar with 3490 technology but don't
>think this is viable because of the low cartridge capacity.  This leaves me
>with DLT and 3590 technologies.   I'd be very interested to hear about any
>experiences, good or bad, with either DLT or 3590.  Would also be looking at
>some sort of tape library (3494 if we go 3590, Odetics if we go DLT).  Right
>now I'm leaning towards DLT because 3590s are very expensive.  Any feedback
>would be appreciated.
>
>Thanks...
>
>Tim Pittson
>Hoechst Celanese Corp.
>pittson1 AT bwmail1.hcc DOT com
>(908) 231-3178
>