IDE drive question: Conner vs. Seagate

[John C. Archambeau]

martin at mwtech.UUCP (Martin Weitzel) writes:
>Due to an error of my distributor I received two IDE drives today. Of
>course, I will return one, but as they are of different brand, I need
>a hint which one to keep. The two are
>
>	- Conner CP320AF (211MB, 16ms)
>	- Seagate ST1239A (210MB, 15ms)
>
>As the specifications are much the same, it may direct my decission
>that the Seagate costs ~15% less, but there are some rumor that the
>Conner is of better quality.
>
>Furthermore I'm a little irritated by some messages concerning OS-fixes
>for IDE drives. (As I were informed by personal mail, there were some
>problems that the drive didn't quite follow the specifications and
>Seagate was explicitely mentioned by one person, but not Conner.)
>
>Finally, in case it should matter: I want to use the drive with SCO
>XENIX/V-386, but it might be that later I move the drive to a system
>running ISC UNIX/386.
>
>Any helpul souls outthere to guide my decission? Thanks in advance.

Conner has much better quality control than Seagate.  But since the ST1239A is
really an Imprimis drive, you couldn't go wrong with keeping that.  I
personally would keep the Conner CP-3204F.

ISC certifies Seagates to work with their Unix, but Conners have been proven
to work in the field.

     // JCA

 /*
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 ** Flames  : /dev/null                     | What to buy?
 ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca at nosc.mil     | EISA or MCA?
 ** INTERNET: jca at pnet01.cts.com            | When will the bus wars end?
 ** UUCP    : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hp-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca
 **--------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 */