I would like a copy too! Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: Braich, Raminder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 10:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Thanks to All That Provided Input for the Share Session
onSQL Co mmands
Importance: High
I would like a copy
It indeed seems very uncertain. The only information I received was that
IBM had withdrawn a BMR promotion. They said that the announcement did
withdraw the BMR from TSM from marketing. But, not promoting the product
can't be a good sign.
Here's what I received...
>|-
Awesome. I'm glad to hear they finally included those! Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: David Longo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 8:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: LTO drive VS 3590E1A
I have a new 3584-L32 library (6 weeks) and it has the Storwa
-Original Message-
From: Zosimo Noriega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 4:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: LTO drive VS 3590E1A
Hello to you...
Everybody saying that LTO Ultrium drive is a latest drive technology that
why we quoting to this to replace our
IBM marketing has always done a great job at preventing "side-by-side"
comparisons on their specifications sheets. They often list different
performance specifications.
As far as I can tell, the IBM 3580 Ultrium drive holds an impressive 100GB
native (2:1 compression) whereas the IBM 3590-E1A can
