Onstream rejects tapes

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

I have an external Onstream SC30e that has performed flawlessly for
almost 4 years. When I turned on my PC and tape drive yesterday, the
drive rejected the tape. I have uninstalled and reinstalled both the
drive (1.09 f/w) and Echo software (3.7.02), but the drive keeps
rejecting any tape placed in it. The drive shows up on boot with the
correct SCSI ID, and there appears to be no SCSI fault. I have used a
cleaning tape, and the tapes appear to be intact.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to the cause of the problem and how
to resolve it?

XP Pro SP1. Adaptec 39160.

The drive has saved my life on more than one occasion and I would prefer
to get it going again as an additional backup to my second HDD and CDs.

I have asked on comp.periphs.scsi, but no workable solution has been
suggested.

--
Ian

 

[user]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:36:49 +0000, Ian Simms
<ilsremovethis@simtaxremovethis.co.uk> wrote:

>I have an external Onstream SC30e that has performed flawlessly for
>almost 4 years. When I turned on my PC and tape drive yesterday, the
>drive rejected the tape. I have uninstalled and reinstalled both the
>drive (1.09 f/w) and Echo software (3.7.02), but the drive keeps
>rejecting any tape placed in it. The drive shows up on boot with the
>correct SCSI ID, and there appears to be no SCSI fault. I have used a
>cleaning tape, and the tapes appear to be intact.

I think that is a sign that the drive is on it's last legs, or there
is something wrong with the tape heads or something inside must have
broken off or the tape heads must be worn out?

>Does anyone have any suggestions as to the cause of the problem and how
>to resolve it?

The suggestion is to replace the drive with a new one because it would
be too expensive to repair it. We live in a throw away society, which
means that we throw things that break in the garbage and get a new
one.

Most of the people in there don't use tape drives anymore. They all
use DVD-RW drives to back up to DVDs. Tape drives are obsolete now and
serve no purpose. It is better to switch to other means of storage.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

In article <ruuco0tc87tituks6t68rclsd5q1g145el@4ax.com>, <>
<?@invalid.com> writes
>On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:36:49 +0000, Ian Simms
><ilsremovethis@simtaxremovethis.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>I have an external Onstream SC30e that has performed flawlessly for
>>almost 4 years. When I turned on my PC and tape drive yesterday, the
>>drive rejected the tape. I have uninstalled and reinstalled both the
>>drive (1.09 f/w) and Echo software (3.7.02), but the drive keeps
>>rejecting any tape placed in it. The drive shows up on boot with the
>>correct SCSI ID, and there appears to be no SCSI fault. I have used a
>>cleaning tape, and the tapes appear to be intact.
>
>I think that is a sign that the drive is on it's last legs, or there
>is something wrong with the tape heads or something inside must have
>broken off or the tape heads must be worn out?
>
>>Does anyone have any suggestions as to the cause of the problem and how
>>to resolve it?
>
>The suggestion is to replace the drive with a new one because it would
>be too expensive to repair it. We live in a throw away society, which
>means that we throw things that break in the garbage and get a new
>one.

Onstream are no more! I doubt very much if I will buy a second hand
drive or another make. Tapes are IMHO very useful, but are now a
comparatively expensive option.

I already also make backups on CD and to another HDD, and will shortly
move on to DVDs.
--
Ian

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:17:05 -0500, < <<> wrote:
>use DVD-RW drives to back up to DVDs. Tape drives are obsolete now and
>serve no purpose. It is better to switch to other means of storage.

Not if you need to backup more data than will fit on a disc. High-capacity
tape is alive and well.

--
Roger Blake
(Subtract 10 for email.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Roger Blake wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:17:05 -0500, < <<> wrote:
>>use DVD-RW drives to back up to DVDs. Tape drives are obsolete now and
>>serve no purpose. It is better to switch to other means of storage.
>
> Not if you need to backup more data than will fit on a disc. High-capacity
> tape is alive and well.

Depends on your volume. A 100 gig disk doesn't cost a whole Hell of a lot
more than a 100 gig tape, and you don't need a multi-thousand-dollar tape
drive to use it.

Above a certain quantity of data tape makes sense. Below that quantity
using hard drives as disposable media makes better economic sense.

And there is no tape drive in the world that will back up the largest
available disk on a single tape.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[peter]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

What about tape autoloders or libraries (like HP ESL9000 with 119TB)?
I have never heard about hard disk autoloaders or libraries.

"J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:cmcd0u11sv1@news2.newsguy.com...
> Roger Blake wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:17:05 -0500, < <<> wrote:
> >>use DVD-RW drives to back up to DVDs. Tape drives are obsolete now and
> >>serve no purpose. It is better to switch to other means of storage.
> >
> > Not if you need to backup more data than will fit on a disc.
High-capacity
> > tape is alive and well.
>
> Depends on your volume. A 100 gig disk doesn't cost a whole Hell of a lot
> more than a 100 gig tape, and you don't need a multi-thousand-dollar tape
> drive to use it.
>
> Above a certain quantity of data tape makes sense. Below that quantity
> using hard drives as disposable media makes better economic sense.
>
> And there is no tape drive in the world that will back up the largest
> available disk on a single tape.
>
> --
> --John
> Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Peter wrote:

> What about tape autoloders or libraries (like HP ESL9000 with 119TB)?
> I have never heard about hard disk autoloaders or libraries.

That would use multiple tapes to back up that single disk. Seems kind of
silly to have a $10K autoloader to back up a $400 disk.

Like I said, above a certain volume tape makes sense. The volume has to be
high enough that the relatively inexpensive media plus the amortized cost
of the drive is less than the cost of using disks as disposable media. For
400 gig it doesn't make much sense to use tape. For 119TB it does. For
now. When 200 TB drives are dropping out of the bottom of the market then
it will be a different story.

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:cmcd0u11sv1@news2.newsguy.com...
>> Roger Blake wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:17:05 -0500, < <<> wrote:
>> >>use DVD-RW drives to back up to DVDs. Tape drives are obsolete now and
>> >>serve no purpose. It is better to switch to other means of storage.
>> >
>> > Not if you need to backup more data than will fit on a disc.
> High-capacity
>> > tape is alive and well.
>>
>> Depends on your volume. A 100 gig disk doesn't cost a whole Hell of a
>> lot more than a 100 gig tape, and you don't need a multi-thousand-dollar
>> tape drive to use it.
>>
>> Above a certain quantity of data tape makes sense. Below that quantity
>> using hard drives as disposable media makes better economic sense.
>>
>> And there is no tape drive in the world that will back up the largest
>> available disk on a single tape.
>>
>> --
>> --John
>> Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
>> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)