schoff@cadmus.UUCP (Martin Lee Schoffstall) (06/26/84)
For reasons beyond my control I need to run SysV, 4.2bsd, and (don't tell anyone) VMS. My best bet it would seem is to stick to a DEC removable disk and the RA60 looks relatively reasonable. Does anyone know what the reliablity of this disk is? I'm not really worried about the performance, just the reliablility. Please respond by mail. Thanks, marty decvax!wivax!cadmus!schoff (usenet) decvax!wivax!cadmus!schoff@ucbvax.arpa (arpa)
Kilmer.WBST@XEROX.ARPA (06/29/84)
Why apologize for running VMS ? UNIX is nice but (gasp) not perfect nor designed for all types of applications. I like VMS (so there !) P.S. We had an RA60 and experienced no problems with it except for obtaining extra disk packs (which I believe is easier these days)
wcs@ho95b.UUCP (59577) (06/30/84)
Marty schoff at Cadmus asks:
For reasons beyond my control I need to run SysV, 4.2bsd, and
(don't tell anyone) VMS. My best bet it would seem is to stick
to a DEC removable disk and the RA60 looks relatively reasonable.
Does anyone know what the reliablity of this disk is?
I'm putting this reply on the net for any of you who are
planning to buy DEC RA81 or RA60s as your only disks. They
are reliable and cheap, but software support is uneven. DEC
has just come out with a driver for System V, which you probably
have to get directly from them. We ran Berkeley on one
machine until we got a beta-version from DEC. (No problem).
VMS, of course, supports them.
--
Bill Stewart
AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
...!ihnp4!ho95b!wcs