jdsb@occrsh.ATT.COM (John_Babcock) (12/22/89)
This is a summary of responses to my question: > I understand that the Quantum 105 Mb drives are a different > mechanism than the P40S or P80S drives. Is this true? Have > people had any problems with the 105 MB? Please email. I'll > summarize if asked. > Thanks! I did not receive many responses, but a lot of people asked me to post. Generally, I hear good things about the drive, but I would still like to know if the Quantum 105 uses a different mechanism than the Quantum 40 or 80. Also, I would appreciate it if someone could read the last message I enclosed and explain it to me. I only caught part of the conversation, but they say you should mount the Quantum 105 upside down. Why should you do this?? I would welcome any additional replies! Those requesting a summary:________________________________________________ Al Goldis goldis@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu BITNET: goldists@uiamvs Tony Jacobs * Center for Engineering Design * U of U * t-jacobs@cs.utah.edu teng-kean siew arpa!zip.eecs.umich.edu!tksiew Rick Zaccone <zaccone%sol.bucknell.edu@CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu> The few responses I got:___________________________________________________ From arpa!tcgould.TN.CORNELL.EDU!eacj Tue Dec 19 14:52:36 EST 1989 Subject: Re: Quantum 105 Mb drives Organization: Cornell Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca NY I have a Quantum 105 Pro drive (SuperMac's XP100i) running in a Mac IIci. It is quick, quiet, and has caused no problems in the couple of months that we have had it. The drive does do an occasional traverse when not explicitly reading or writing, but this is normal for many drives (probably done for maintaining position calibration). In any case, the spontaneous motion is nothing like what people are reporting for the 40 and 80 meg Quantums with the "PROMS from hell." <<NOTE from JDSB: The seeking here is probably the timing seek. I've >> << heard that the Quantums read a timing track every once in a >> << while to readjust for the drive as it warms up. >> - Julian -- Julian Vrieslander Neurobiology & Behavior, W250 Mudd Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853 UUCP: {cmcl2,decvax,rochester,uw-beaver}!cornell!batcomputer!eacj INTERNET: eacj@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu BITNET: eacj@CRNLTHRY ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Path: occrsh!att!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!nuchat!buster!cshotton >From: cshotton@buster.irby.com (Chuck Shotton) Subject: Re: Quantum 105 Mb drives Organization: Buster Irby, Stafford, Tx I have a LaCie 105 which uses a Quantum HDA. It's been up and running for about 4 months, close to non-stop, and I've had no problems whatsoever. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Path: occrsh!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!mr2t+ >From: mr2t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Tod Rose) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware Subject: Quantum 105 -- problems? Date: 14 Dec 89 22:31:16 GMT Organization: Class of '91, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA So far, all the bad news about Quantum HDs has dealt specifically with the 40 and 80 meg drives. Nobody has said anything about the 105 meg drive. In this week's *MacWeek*, MacZone and ACI are advertising 105 meg Quantum internals, manufacturer's 2 year warranty, for $695. This is $200 less than LaCie's price for the *80 meg* internal and $300 dollars less than its price for the 105. My question is, do the reliability problems associated with the 40 and 80 meg drives have any bearing on the 105 meg drive? I'm looking at a new SE/30, and that $695 is almost too good to pass up. -mike ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From uokmax!apple!usc!samsung!uunet!inmet!dvb Tue Dec 19 09:41:28 CST 1989 Article 869 of comp.sys.mac.hardware: Path: occrsh!uokmax!apple!usc!samsung!uunet!inmet!dvb >From: dvb@inmet.inmet.com Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware Subject: Re: Quantum 105S HD Message-ID: <69900002@inmet> Date: 15 Dec 89 15:46:00 GMT References: <89@<AFOIANI> Lines: 16 Nf-ID: #R:<AFOIANI:89:inmet:69900002:000:556 Nf-From: inmet.inmet.com!dvb Dec 15 10:46:00 1989 > by truesdel@ics.uci.edu in inmet:comp.sys.mac.hardware */ > Sorry, I didn't quite understand you. Do you mean that it DOES > work better if you put the drive in "backwards"? Does the ribbon > cable go over the top of the drive to the connector, which would > then be close to the CRT as opposed to close to the back of the > case? > Scott Truesdell Sorry about the delay--that is exactly it. It seems like a tough stretch at first--I didn't think it would make it and then it all fell into place and has worked flawlessly since. dvb@inmet.inmet.com ____________________________________________________________________________ * John Babcock att!occrsh!jdsb * AT&T Network Systems jdsb@occrsh.att.com * Oklahoma City, OK Disclaimer: I speak on my own, not as AT&T.