Spreading False SFF Informa

Jim McGrath /G=Jim/S=McGrath/O=QMAILGW/PRMD=QUANTUM/ADMD=MCI/C=US/ at qntm.com
Thu Jan 20 11:40:10 PST 1994

        Reply to:   Spreading False SFF Information

I AM speaking on behalf of Quantum.  A major PC OEM just informed me
that the SFF committee has endorsed using LBA mode.  This is an
obvious reference to Hale's project proposal that was approved by the
SFF committee this month, with the understanding that the approval by
SFF was to approval work on a proposal on the topic of > 528 MB
extensions, not on any specific details.  Indeed, the proposals Hale
has issued have a number of technical issues outstanding, including
LBA mode requirement (I believe our verbal agreement at the meeting
was to drop any mention of LBA mode as being a requirement in the
next draft).

I know which company is spreading this (mis)information,
and it disturbs me.  It creates confusion in the minds of our
customers, and can possibly lead them to stating internal positions
and direct internal work that will later embarass them and possibly
cause schedule slips.  Neither is in the interest of my customers, so
please - report what ACTUALLY HAPPENED at a meeting and report
YOUR DESIRES AS TO WHAT IS TO HAPPEN separately, do not treat
the later as the former.


More information about the T10 mailing list