Talk:REV (disk)

UDF

I see the disks use UDF. Why don't they work like normal hard drives and floppies where you can format them with any filesystem you want? --Slashme 11:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

According to Iomega, its because UDF doesn't have any of the arbitrary limitations of the other filesystems. They also work with HFS+ on Macs, so I'd wager you can format them any way you want with the caveat that it won't work with the IOMega backup software. [[1]]. I left mine as UDF. I use smbclient,tar,and gzip for backups. EjayHire 15:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I reformatted my 9 drive cartridges with ext3 under Linux for the journaling support. Plus, one was unusable out of the box until I reformatted it. Needless to say, I don't (and can't) use Iomega's proprietary backup software.

It is possible to format a REV cartridge with another format such a FAT32. There are two problems with this:

1) REV drives identify themselves as peripheral device type 5 or a multimedia device. This is the same device type of most optical devices like DVD-RW. Some operating systems may have difficulty with the combination of peripheral device type 5 and a FAT format.

2) REV drives employ a two dimensional error correction system that requires the host to send data in 64KB aligned chunks to achieve optimal performance. The UDF format used on REV cartridges helps to force 64KB aligned transfers. RedChaos 00:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Not a tape drive emulator

We're beginning to encounter a few people with the mistaken impression the REV is a drop-in replacment for a tape drive, which is incorrect. Unfortunately, we're finding this out after they bought one and wonder why tape backup software isn't working with it. Device will not understand Unix "mt" commands, etc. Looks like the marketing campaign is working a little too well. 64.88.170.34 (talk) 20:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

REV technology is _not_ similar to RDX technology

This has recently turned out to be an important practical point for users of the Retrospect Windows backup software, which still allows definition of Backup Sets with a legacy Removable Disk device type that was intended for "super-floppy" devices such as REV. Until the last major release of that software, the text for the appropriate UI dialog said that RDX devices as well as REV devices should be defined as Removable Disk—which caused problems for users of RDX devices. BTW, because of Iomega's acquisition by EMC and the later discontinuation of REV, most references at the bottom of this article no longer work. DovidBenAvraham (talk) 00:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Re-inserted basic info in this prgf., without "marketing hype", using as refs. material in this article and the RDX article themselves. DovidBenAvraham (talk) 10:09, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on REV (disk). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080430204458/http://www.gearlog.com:80/2008/03/iomega_introduces_rev_120gb_ba.php to http://www.gearlog.com/2008/03/iomega_introduces_rev_120gb_ba.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:58, 10 November 2016 (UTC)