[comp.sys.atari.st] Seagate 296N ROM problems

obryan@gumby.cc.wmich.edu (Mark O'Bryan) (09/05/89)

Here's some more information from my friend who's been discussing
his ROM 8 problems both with Seagate, and HDI (where he bought 
the drive).

~~~~~~~~~

From: bowden (Michael L. Bowden)
Subject: More ST296N info (negative)
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 89 14:00:33 EDT


I just got off the phone from another go-round with Seagate and HDI regarding
the ROM upgrade for the 296N.  Things aren't as rosey as I had hoped, for
several reasons:

(from HDI)
 - The ROMs are NOT socketed
 - You must send the drive back, they won't ship you the 
   replacement first
 - They have no idea how long it would take to get a new drive in
   with the correct ROM in it (HDI doesn't even know how to tell
   what ROM revision the drive has)

(from Seagate)
 - Seagate isn't currently shipping the drive with rev 7 or 12 ROMs
 - The drive would go back to the repair facility; you won't get the
   original drive back; and it's at least a 2 week turnaround
 - They aren't advertising it as a 1:1 drive, so they don't seem to
   feel any pressure on this issue

Pam Swanson said to call back in a month or so if I wanted to check up
on the situation, and offered an apology, though there isn't much that
she can do about the situation.

Sounds like you may be better off getting one of the other drives that'll
do 1:1 for a few dollars more, if you're interested in that kind of
performance.  Sure does complicate the equation (again), doesn't it.

-- 
Mark T. O'Bryan                 Internet:  obryan@gumby.cc.wmich.edu
Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, MI  49008

saj@chinet.chi.il.us (Stephen Jacobs) (09/06/89)

In article <843@gumby.cc.wmich.edu>, obryan@gumby.cc.wmich.edu (Mark O'Bryan) writes:
> Here's some more information from my friend who's been discussing
> his ROM 8 problems both with Seagate, and HDI (where he bought 
> the drive).
[some discussion of specifics]
> Sounds like you may be better off getting one of the other drives that'll
> do 1:1 for a few dollars more, if you're interested in that kind of
> performance.  Sure does complicate the equation (again), doesn't it.

I'm nothing if not stubborn.  I have a ST296N drive.  I like it.  I recommend
it to anyone who asks.  The average seek time is great, and that's the 
parameter that most limits disk speed in most practical applications.  At 2:1
interleave you're in the general realm of three quarters of a megabyte per
second throughput (burst).  For my usual 10 - 30 K utility or data file, that
literally means the actual read is done in the blink of an eye.  About the
only way to improve on that in general is with cacheing of the FAT and full
tracks of data.  About the only application I can think of where blasting in
the entire capacity of a mega 4 in 6 seconds might be a limitation is anima-
tion.  Slow seeks are another matter: it doesn't take much fragmentation to get
the heads going all over the disk, and then you'll see the difference between
a fast-seeking 296N and a medium-speed-seeking ST238R.
                                    Steve J.