On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Alexander Jolk wrote:
> I understand that tape changing is also a somewhat faster process if
> barcode labels are used because it doesn't need to do a load-read-unload
> cycle for every tape, but I'm not sure about that.

If that's true (which I *can't* vouch for, having been stuck in
chg-manual land till now :-), it would also mean that the barcode
reader saves wear and tear on the tapes.  ISTM that every
load-read-unload to check the tape label should count as a "use"
for purposes of deciding when to retire the tape -- 99.9% of the
media wasn't touched, but if that first .1% goes bad, you've got
problems.  Does that make sense to people?  If so, it seems like
the barcode reader could pay for itself fairly quickly -- and in
a far more measurable way than just convenience.

--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        erics AT telepres DOT com
|  |  /
It must be said that they would have sounded better if the singer
wouldn't throw his fellow band members to the ground and toss the
drum kit around during songs.
        - Patrick Lenneau