RLL formats & SCO Xenix

[Karl Denninger]

In article <26483 at cup.portal.com> Anthony_Mak_Fiorentino at cup.portal.com writes:
>I asked for an upgrade of hard disk from some 65MB to 110MB on my last purcha
>of an 386 computer; only to find out when I looked closely that
>the hard disk was formatted up to 110 with an RLL controller. I should think
>that it si false advertising to say you are selling a 30MB disk when it is
>actually a 20MB disk formatted to 30MB capacity.  I take it that  the 95 adde
>cost on my bill was actually for the us of the RLL technology. I need tyo 
>look at whether I paid for anything new at all. My other concern is what 
>effect RLL can have on running SCO Xenix. The literature refers to some 
>legal use of some RLL disks by Xenix.  Should I return it for another type
>of disk? Any help appreciated. As an non-engineer I am giving up on
>understanding all these hardware particulars.

There's nothing wrong with 2,7RLL disk drives and controllers.

Providing, of course, that they work reliably.

Before people start hooting, let me explain (again, this has been rehashed
several times).  There's nothing magical about 2,7RLL encoding.  It cannot
trash a drive, contrary to several people's exhortations.  If you are using
a certified drive (one which the manufacturer says will work) then your
reliability should be no worse that that of a MFM drive.

In fact, if you have a track-cache controller, the RLL drive will usually be
faster!  

We use 4 RLL drives off 2 controllers in "ddsw1"; works great.

--
Karl Denninger (karl at ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Public Access Data Line: [+1 708 566-8911], Voice: [+1 708 566-8910]
Macro Computer Solutions, Inc.		"Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"