I hate to throw a spanner in the works but no one has mentioned U-Matic tapes.  Normally used for video recording the early CD audio and CD-Rom industry encoded the digital image on to U-Matic tapes which were then used to drive the laser for writing to the CD Master.

On 3/8/2023 11:42 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:

On Mar 8, 2023, at 12:20 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> 
wrote:

On 3/8/23 06:19, Paul Koning wrote:


I wouldn't exclude those, certainly not if they are relevant to the evolution 
of the technology.  Are X1 tapes (and Eliott tapes if they are the same format, 
which I don't know) in some way anticipating LINCtape and DECtape?  Are they an 
independent invention of roughly the same concept?  For that matter, would you 
exclude DECtape on the grounds that it's single vendor?  I hope not.  For that 
matter, I suspect the Uniservo I format is specific to Univac, yet you can't 
very well exclude that from a history of magnetic tape data recording.
I view "captive formats" such as DECtape to be evolutionary dead ends.

Consider, for example, the Datamatic 1000 tapes--I doubt that more than
a handful of people here have ever heard of the system.  A captive format.

Or the early Uniservo metal tapes?
I would disagree with that blanket assertion, for two reasons.  One is that something 
isn't an "evolutionary dead end" only if nothing later was inspired by it and 
constructed, to some extent, along similar lines.  In that sense the Uniservo tapes are 
not at all a dead end; instead, they are the ancestor of all later tapes.  Properties 
like metal vs. plastic media and 6 tracks vs. 7 or 9 or more are details.

Second, I would consider a format to be significant if it had a major market 
presence and major place in the technology space.  In that sense, DECtape I 
clearly belongs -- being either the primary or a significant secondary storage 
device for a decade or two of some of the world's most successful computer 
lines.

Similarly, is DLT a "dead end"?  It was captive to some extent until it spread 
out, but then LTO replaced it.  On the other hand, isn't LTO clearly an evolutionary 
variant of DLT?

I'd agree that there are a number of other formats that were neither significant players 
nor a significant influence on later work.  The CDC 14-track tapes would fit that 
description, and the Eliot or X1 10-track tapes most likely as well.  But I would argue 
that "if it wasn't an industry or ISO standard it doesn't count" is too 
restrictive a view, especially if you aim to produce a history of the technology space.

        paul


Reply via email to