Roger Merchberger skrev:
>Rumor has it that Iggy Drougge may have mentioned these words:
>>Glen Goodwin skrev:
>>
>> >One machine, or many? If you have a pile of cards, one machine, and none
>> >of the cards work in that specific box, I'd suggest that there may be a
>> >fault in the box, or another device in there which conflicts with your
>> >SCSI cards.
>>
>>Who cares what the cause is? The point is that it won't work.
>If the cause is the motherboard, you can't (justly) accuse the SCSI card of
>being the problem...
That's most probably not the case.
>>I see that BIOS setup utility on the cards as a sympthom of the low level of
>>integration. The cards behave as an alien entity in the computer.
>With my job, one realizes that *every* card is an alien entity -- I've had
>*much* less heartburn getting add-on SCSI cards to work compared to
>PCI-based add-on IDE cards (which, BTW, have their own BIOS too - and a
>much more useless one at that...) and you apparently have never gotten a
>Sound Blaster Live MP3/5.1 card working under Windows 2000... It took me
>over 4 hours to research that one, whereas my 4-year-old --ahem -- no
>longer supported -- PCI Diamond MultiMedia Fireport 40 Ultra SCSI card
>installed without a hitch...
Should I envy you??;-)
>> >> and they don't behave like the IDE hard drives.
>>
>> >Well, that's the point, right? ;>)
>>
>>Not really. IMO a drive is a drive is a drive is a drive.
>You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I cannot subscribe to that
>point of view -- especially when I want my drive to do something a normal
>drive isn't supposed to do.
>And don't get me started on IDE 2.1 Orb Drives... Love the storage, *Hate*
>the setup... (and XP doesn't support it yet...) SCSI "just plain works..."
I'd never stand up for IDE. I only use it out of necessity, like everyone
else. But I'm not so sure that my next drive will be an IDE. Not if I'm not
getting a new IDE controller at the same time.
>> >> They
>> >> have their own little BIOSes and things which I'm not used to from other
>> >> systems.
>>
>> >Those little BIOSes (the ones with a setup program) are a *big* advantage.
>> >Just today I was cursing the fact that the BIOS on the ATA-66 controller I
>> >was installing didn't have a setup program. It took me two hours to get
>> >all six IDE drives working properly. With a decent SCSI card it would
>> >have been 15 minutes, tops (barring any bad drives or cables).
>>
>>Why? I've never had any need for a SCSI BIOS on my SCSI computers.
>And you won't until you need to boot from any drive that's not ID 0 on the
>board (like booting from CD, etc...)
That's just stupid.
On my DECstation, I issue a boot command like:
boot 6/rz2/netbsd
to boot NetBSD from SCSI ID 2. If I'd like to boot Ultrix from ID 4 instead,
I'd type
boot 6/rz4/vmunix
or something like that.
On the Amiga, what matters is the boot priority of any particular drive or
partition. That is independent of the SCSI or IDE ID. If I don't want to boot
the device with the highest priority, I select another boot device in the
Early Startup menu.
And then we have PS/2s, which start booting at device 6 and work their way
down.
AFAIK, none of my SCSI machines have any SCSI device at unit 0, except for the
PS/2s, where the controller is ID 0.
Finding your boot device based on SCSI ID just sounds stupid.
>>For example, the onboard IDE controller in the Amiga 4000 and 1200 appear to
>>the system as scsi.device. And NetBSD/amiga only recently switched from "IDE
>>on SCSI" to the machine-independent WDC device. =)
>And the only way I can get my IDE 16X Plextor CD-RW to work under Linux is
>with SCSI emulation - without it I end up with digital frizbees...
>Thankfully, SCSI works for me! ;-)
It should work for everyone except the wallet. =(
And it just seems absolutely stupid that IDE has survived to this day. By now,
IDE has evolved from the set of buffers on an ISA bus that it originally was
into a beats which is almost as complex as SCSI, while still not nearly as
flexible. At the same time, even though drives for both interfaces share more
and more parts, SCSI has only become more and more expensive, and now it's not
even an alternative for a lot of semi-professional applications. It's really
absurd, and a testament to how the mass-market mechanisms are a very dangerous
factor to development.
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6a.
Life begins at '030. Fun begins at '040. Impotence begins at '86.
Received on Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:34:34 BST