ot... at it again scsi tape drive in windows 95

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun Jan 20 19:12:12 2002

That system's so small, he should have no trouble getting by without Win9x.
If the drive has only 165 MB, it's unlikely Win9x will fit comfortably. I've
had the setup program complain that it needed 240 MB to install. The trick I
use is DOSLFNBK + DOS backup utility. It works fine and wouldn't be so slow
that, on a small box like this one, it would take objectionably long.

I doubt the problem is with the SCSI bus getting saturated. ON a little
system like this one, it won't be utilized that heavily. Backup will move
data at about 10-20 MB/sec on a slow, cheap adapter, e.g. ADAPTEC AHA1522,
etc. With a '486 and an old drive like that one, it probably can't go much
faster regardless of the controller. One with DMA capability might perform
better than one using programmable I/O, however.

Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Chase" <vaxzilla_at_jarai.org>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: ot... at it again scsi tape drive in windows 95


> On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Ron Hudson wrote:
>
> > I do have a DOS diskette that I can boot with that has
> > all the Adaptec drivers and Syquest junk.
> >
> > Here's the rundown of the machine:
> > 486 66 DX cpu with 16mb memory
> > 165 mb SCSI hard drive internal
> > 40 mb SCSI Syquest drive internal
> > 640x480 16 color video
> > SCSI CDROM external
> > Tanberg TDC3800 SCSI tape external.
> > 5.25 & 3.5 combined floppy disks.
>
> Are the disk drives and the SCSI tape device on the same controller?
> And if so, what's the controller type? I missed it if you've mentioned
> it already. It's possible that the SCSI bus is getting saturated,
> and I doubt Win95 does little to aid the situation with intelligent
> handling of I/O.
>
> -brian.
>
>
Received on Sun Jan 20 2002 - 19:12:12 GMT