🚀 go-pugleaf

Arnold H Lee <meatball@wam.umd.edu> wrote in article
<34913d16.2409107@news.wam.umd.edu>...
> offhand, scsi prices have dropped dramatically.
> i have managed to buy a 2 gig seagate barracuda (7200 rpm, narrow) for
> only 160. 

That's a virtually useless drive.  Only a single narrow drive like this can
be used bandwidth wise on a SCSI channel. For $160 one can get a 4GB EIDE
drive.
 
> the prices are comparable to ide.  and why limit yourself to 4
> devices?  2 hard disks, a CD-R...a CD player...on an IDE system, i'm
> done.  but i plan to install perhaps another hard disk and i'd sure
> like to get my hands on a cd-changer (16 speed, 5 disk?  mmm .)
> 
> with scsi, you just get so many upgrade options.  many more toys for
> the off-the-wall pc enthusiast.
> 
> On Thu, 11 Dec 97 13:52:34 GMT, 4ms2u$ms@michaels.demon.co.uk (Michael
> Salem) wrote:
> 
> >This discussion of SCSI vs EIDE/UDMA has been very interesting. The 
> >conclusions seem to be:
> >
> >In situations where mutiple disc access requests are infrequent, the
latest
> >EIDE technology performs comparably to SCSI with similar hardware.
> >
> >With multiple simultaneous disc access requests, SCSI is faster.
> >
> >In other words, by and large, use EIDE (cheaper) on users' workstations,

> >SCSI (faster) on file servers handling many access requests.
> >
> >Which is what people running networks have been doing for the last
decade 
> >or so...
> >
> >One other point related to economics: maufacturers usually bring out
their
> >latest improvements in SCSI first (for the same reason books are first 
> >published as expensive hardbacks), so a leading-edge SCSI drive is
likely 
> >to be better than the latest EIDE.
> >
> >So if you must have the best possible performance, regardless of price,
on 
> >your super-duper single-user workstation, buy the latest SCSI drive.
> >
> >Best wishes,
> >-- 
> >Michael Salem (email: use "Reply" command, or mgs at
michaels.demon.co.uk)
> >Netiquette Guidelines say: Content of follow-up post should exceed
quoted
> >content; signature shouldn't exceed 4 lines
> >
> 
>