>>>>>>[shrug] perhaps the reference to "tape" is something like "tar" on *nix systems? (i.e. an file bundling format rather than physical media) ... or the virtual cardpunch/reader found on IBMs VM systems was used to transport data between different computers?
>>>>>
>>>>>I always head the idea tar is /was the directory structure used on tapes. You need to read the whole data to get the last file. No random access. The 'nix folks just stuck to it - tar is a mighty tool, but the file format. OMIPU.
>>>>
>>>>A tar file would be analogous to creating an ISO file prior to burning data onto CD-ROM or DVD-ROM (storage to tape and optical disc could be timing-sensitive -- writing to a single file would help the data to stream more consistently, especially if the buffering capability is limited).
>>>
>>>In the days of yore one would stream the output direct to the tape - not enough space for a buffer this large. ;)
>>>But the 'nix idea of devices, files and mounts simply allows to redirect the output to a file - or what I do direct stream to untar it into a temp folder to zip it later on. The tar is great for backup control, but as storage, tar-ball, shudder.
>>
>>tar and shar were relatively convenient way to bundle files for transport.
>
>You say it. Relatively and just for transport - if one need to untar all the access problems simply where not existing.
>The most odd, slow and error prone idea was tar.z - the whole tar ball zipped as one file. Instead of zipping the single files.
>(－‸ლ)
>
>Don't get me wrong, tar is a nice tool, but for transporting data there are better.

note that I was using past tense. 😉

and let's not forget there is often some amount of inertia that keeps certain older formats in use.