gviernes@WHEELER-EMH.ARPA (01/10/87)
I've been having a read problem that seems to be getting the
best of me. I bought The Newsroom, but I haven't been able to
run after the first couple times. I resorted to using a cracked
copy. Recently I borrowed the Music Construction Set from a friend
to check it out. I couldn't run that. And I had problems making
'archive' copies of newer software. They run ok, but when I try
to copy them, I get read errors. I have an enhanced //e and my
drive speeds are 200.2 and 199.7 on drives 1 and 2, repectively.
I've tried to get them closer, but it's not easy. I've been told
that a rule of thumb is to have drive 1 run a little slower than
drive 2.
Any words of wisdom would be deeply appreciated.paulb@ttidca.UUCP (Paul Blumstein) (01/13/87)
In article <8701092151.aa02312@SPARK.BRL.ARPA> gviernes@WHEELER-EMH.ARPA writes: > > I've been having a read problem that seems to be getting the >best of me. ... >...to copy them, I get read errors. I have an enhanced //e and my >drive speeds are 200.2 and 199.7 on drives 1 and 2, repectively. Perhaps your problem is that your drives are too slow. The "correct" speed is 300 RPM. ============================================================================= Paul Blumstein | There's no point in being grown up if you can't Citicorp/TTI | be childish sometimes. -- Dr. Who Santa Monica, CA 90405 +------------------------------------------------- (213) 450-9111 {philabs,trwrb,csun,psivax}!ttidca!paulb
blgardne@esunix.UUCP (01/22/87)
in article <280@ttidca.UUCP>, paulb@ttidca.UUCP says: > > In article <8701092151.aa02312@SPARK.BRL.ARPA> gviernes@WHEELER-EMH.ARPA writes: >> I've been having a read problem that seems to be getting the >>best of me. ... >>...to copy them, I get read errors. I have an enhanced //e and my >>drive speeds are 200.2 and 199.7 on drives 1 and 2, repectively. > > Perhaps your problem is that your drives are too slow. The "correct" > speed is 300 RPM. > ============================================================================= If the drive speed was really 200 _RPM_ any disk would be completly unreadable! I don't think even a broken drive is capable of 200 rpm. It wasn't clearly stated by the original poster, but my bet is that drive speed was checked with Copy II+. Copy II+ reports drive speed in milliseconds, not rpm. 200 ms = 300 rpm. The drive speeds quoted above are well within tolerance. Both of mine are set a touch on the slow side (200.0 to 201.0 ms). Remember more time = slower speed! As far as the read errors, drive speed is not the problem (unless of course they were written on another system that was way off on it's drive speed). How long since you cleaned your read/write heads? -- ================================================= "The Admiral is well aware of the regulations..." ================================================= Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland {ihnp4, decvax}!decwrl!esunix!blgardne 560 Arapeen Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 (801) 582-5847
ranger@ecsvax.UUCP (01/23/87)
> >drive speeds are 200.2 and 199.7 on drives 1 and 2, repectively. > > Perhaps your problem is that your drives are too slow. The "correct" > speed is 300 RPM. I think he means that the disk diagnostic software was reporting revolution times of 200.2 ans 199.7 ms. 300 RPM is equivalent to 200 ms per revolution. Rick Fincher ranger@ecsvax