Re: Interesting idea

--- In [email protected], Tony Harminc <tharminc@...> wrote:
>
> On 10 October 2010 17:10, idc3009i <idc3009i@...> wrote:
> 
> > I think there might be a problem in attaching 3350s to a 3090, even if you could find any.  The place I was working when the 3350s were phased out did so because the new machine was not capable of supporting them for some reason.  I don't remember exactly why this was, but they also had to get rid of the MSS at the same time because it was tied to the 3350s for staging space (a pity really because it was quite amusing watching it work).
> 
> IIRC the MSS supported only 3330s... But I may not RC.
> 
> Tony H.
>

from an ancient document:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The IBM 3850 Mass Storage System
The following photos were taken by Bob Resnikoff about 1982. The IBM 3850 Mass Storage System was the monster storage device of its day. Columbia's MSS had a capacity of 102.2 GB: 2000 cartridges of 50MB each; it was used to hold the entire 1980 USA Census database and make it available to users of Columbia's IBM mainframe computers.
.......
A panoramic machine-room view with the MSS in the background. Because of the foreshortening and distortion of the wide-angle lens, the massive size of the MSS can not be fully appreciated in this picture. A modified 3830 controller, Mass Storage Controller (MSC), is internal to the MSS. At left center are two IBM 3830 control units and the four 3350 staging disks (which ran in 3330 mode because the MSS software didn't support 3350s).
-------------------------------------------------------------------

So both you (the 3330 and the 3350 supporter;-) are right.

It's astonishing that in my little PC I have a tenfolds storage capacity than that old monster...at about 1/20000 of its cost (over $2,000,000).

BFN

Paul