Talk:Magnetic-tape data storage

message: "...tape is a sequential access medium while disk is a random access medium..."
Please don't call disk random access. It may have a much lower seek time than tape, but it is still very much a sequential storage format.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.12.50 (talk) 20:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Random access" 

message: Hi "K", I agree that sequential access is an important subject to cover for this topic.  I moved the previous text to a subsection of 'Technical Details (and edited it) because the file system stuff is a little more technical than an average reader might be interested in.  Let's put a general sentence or two in the opening section and put the more specific file layout details in the technical section. -- Austin Murphy 21:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gosh, I tought you've removed it completely. It slipped my attention that you've just moved the text, sorry. --Kubanczyk 12:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sequential access 

message: A merge of content from the Data tape cartridge article was suggested, and I believe that it is a good idea - there really isn't anything in that article that is not already (or could not already be) covered in this one.  However, I had trouble figuring out where, and if, the data from that article should be placed in this one.  Here is the content from Data tape cartridge:
Information storage in year 1949 meant books, filing cabinets or punch cards. Tape cartridge was the stuff of science fiction. The limitations of punch cards were becoming obvious. The data storage problem as acres of filing cabinets filled with punched cards containing Social Security data echoed that a more compact means of storing data needed to be developed. The emergence of magnetic tape in 1952 by IBM was a big leap in terms of data storage. Throughout the 1950s and 60s, magnetic tape units offered successive improvement in data storage.
IBM produced the first automated data tape in 1974 bringing with it great innovations that in turn led the technology to a newer heights of data storage. One breakthrough was the introduction of 5.5 inch square data tape cartridge storing up to 200 MB data and executing at the rate of 3 MB/s requiring less than half of the floor space of an equivalent installation of its predecessor technology – magnetic tape units - from just a decade earlier.
Data tape cartridge was widely used in the early 70s and 80s for Data storage (a format of storing and backing up computer data on a storage device). The drawback is that tape drive must spend a considerable amount of time winding tape between reels to read any one particular piece of data. As a result, tape cartridges have very slow average seek times. However, it replaced many of the demerits of its predecessor technology (magnetic tape) with its high speed, non- bulkiness, low cost and stability. Now-a-days, we use the same technology of data tape cartridge in terms of 4 mm/8 mm data tapes, mini DV, VHS video etc.
References:
1. Storing the information age: 50 years of tape storage innovation: http://www-8.ibm.com/nz/media/downloads/IBMarticles/Storing_the_Information_Age.pdf
2. Wikipedia reference: http://en.wikipedia.org
3. Data tape category range by Sony.
I am unfamiliar with this subject.  Is there any information contained above that should be placed in the Magnetic tape data storage article?  I know that the article I've redirected had major tone issues, but is there anything factual that we should place into this article from it that isn't already present?  Thanks for the input.  *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 21:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirected [[Data tape cartridge]] 

message: It would be good to have some comments (or a reference to, for instance, Digital_permanence) about shelf life of the media, possibly compared with other media (notably hard drives and flash).  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.168.13.209 (talk) 14:34, August 22, 2007 (UTC) 
The manufactures of Enterprise Tape Media warrant their tape for 30 years of self life. The question becomes will there be a drive to read it? The 3480 media began in 1984, and still can be read today.141.202.248.52 (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tape Lifetime 

message: There is only one passing reference to Exabyte, which needs to be expanded. Exabyte did much to kill 9-track (certainly) as a backup medium since a 2GB cartridge could be left unattended instead of having operators changing tapes. DLT effectively killed the Exabyte due to superior performance and capacity.
Seismic acquisition has always been a big user of tape , and 21 track , one inch tape was used in large quantities before GCR recording of 9 track , half inch tape really took over.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.169.130.254 (talk) 10:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of formats 

message: What about the physical mechanisms involved in recording and reading?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.120.155.124 (talk) 19:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Same as for hard disk drive. See also Tape drive. --Kubanczyk (talk) 09:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical mechanisms 

message: The section confuses the notions of random access (it takes the same amount of time to read any block on the device), sequential access (it takes a lot longer to read some blocks than others), device i/o (reads and writes to the physical device with no structure imposed by the operating system), and a filesystem (reads and writes to abstract device; units of storage can be accessed by name).Glrx (talk) 16:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random access to data 

message: I don't know much on the subject, but I think that the "Viability" section should be scrapped and re-written by someone who does. I looked up this article while reading about the fact that the tape market has barely declined in the last 30-odd years. It seems that the people who claim that tape storage is on its way out aren't the people who has a reason to use it. From what I have read, there is no current viable alternative for long-term storage. Disks need power; tapes do not. Disks usually fail within 10 years or so; tapes do not.
Also, I have a feeling that the $37,000 figure is a bit misleading. Whether it is true or not, it doesn't necessarily reflect typical pricing. According to the .pdf file linked at the end, tapes sell for less than $1/GB (according to Brett Roscoe, Dell Senior manager) and that doesn't count compression.
Note: the article is dated at 2008 and is sponsored by Dell.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.108.130 (talk) 10:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The viability section appears biased, but the underlying issue seems significant. There are characteristics that should come out in the comparisons: cost per TB, volume of a cartridge, access time, transfer rate, areal density, operation costs, reliability, media lifetime, and power consumption. How such large stores are used is also significant. The section must also respect WP:NOR. Glrx (talk) 00:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Viability 

message: It's interesting (from a trivial point of view, anyway) that a 1969 episode of the spy parody show "Get Smart" already uses compact cassettes (called "data cartridges" in the show) to control a computerized grand piano, whereas (as I understand it) the Kansas City standard for data compact cassettes was introduced in 1975 (and the Yamaha digital Disklavier in 1987)... -- megA (talk) 12:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prophetic use on TV 

message: Tape can be Sequential or Random. There is really no mention of current supported tape that is currently in the field. Difference of LTO generations. DLT vs LTO vs SDLT vs DDS vs MLR/SLR vs AIT? How about Ultrium and how that pertains to the advancement of LTO. What do all those aforementioned acronyms stand for? What is the future of tape?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.8.230.2 (talk) 12:30, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: So Much Wrong

message: Can the T10000C tape drive perform both a read and a write operation at the same time on the same cassette? Sofia Koutsouveli (talk) 11:36, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  T10000C tape drive 

message: In these edits,  and , an unsourced addition was made to the article:
 Helical scan recording writes short dense tracks in diagonal manner. This recording method is used by virtually all videotape systems since quad (transverse) was being phased out, and several data tape formats.
I reverted this the first time, because A) it is not sourced (although, the entire paragraph is unsourced), B) it introduces the word "quad" and truncates "transverse scan" in a way that could confuse readers, C) it is vague about "phased out by whom" and D) it is misplaced because it breaks up the intended conjunction of both videotape systems and data tape formats.
I've laid out my reasoning here. Pinging . If they would care to justify their version, without the insulting language, please, I'll be happy to discuss it here. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 22:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the difference between transverse and helical just the angle of the tracks? It's not as if the tape is stopped while each head of a quad machine swipes across it. Jeh (talk) 23:06, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:   I suppose you could view it that way, but the helical scan mechanism involves wrapping the tape around most of the circumference of the spinning cylindrical disk which makes it a fairly complex evolutionary step beyond the transverse scan. Except for it being unsourced, I don't have objections to the way the section was written. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 01:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transverse phaseout 

message: In 1969, a Tri-Data's Cartifile stored data on minicomputers. See http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/tridata/Tri-Data_4096_Brochure_Feb69.pdf Glrx (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cartridges available starting in the mid 1970s 

message: The article mentions the Exabyte format just once. From the mid-80s it became ubiquitous on mainframes and PCs, lasting until the early 2000s. Tapes were 8mm video and were $5 apiece.  It was replaced by DAT tapes on PCs and by AIT tapes for those with money. The biggest drawback of tapes is the sequential access, and low read speeds. Hard drives can also be placed in cartridges and used in storage silos. They are much faster, cheaper, and have random access. Disks can be read and re-written during a single pass to counter magnetic aging. Tapes must be fully read before a re-write.00:52, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exabyte 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:NOR, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 18:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations