🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C1Fo40.JFF@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
>I've heard the same is true for many SCSI devices - people
>often have trouble when mixing and matching. It shouldn't 
>happen but it does, supposedly. No direct experience how-
>ever. 

This is, for the most part, no longer true.  A long time ago, when
devices "conformed" to a very ill-defined non-standard (later somewhat
standardized as SCSI-1), people did have interoperability problems --
because the SCSI standard wasn't enough of one to allow someone to
build a working drive or host adapter without making their own
interpretations.  There was even this thing called SASI, the
predecessor to SCSI, that was somewhat similar to SCSI and if you were
really lucky, a SASI device might work with a host adapter that
claimed to be SCSI.

With the advent of the SCSI-2 standard, things have gotten a great
deal better.  Now, the biggest problem you're likely to have is that
your host adapter won't be supported by the operating system you plan
to run; however, this can be avoided by checking which host adapters
the OS you're running supports, and getting one of them.  If a SCSI
device that was made relatively recently (i.e., 1990 or later) fails
to interoperate with one of the mainstream SCSI host adapters (i.e.,
Adaptec, Future Domain, DTC, Always -- NOT Seagate), I'd send it back
to the manufacturer with a nasty note.  This is 1993, not 1983, and
anything that claims to be SCSI had better actually be SCSI, not some
manufacturer's in-house abortion of same.

-- 
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   |  have to remember that the nucleus of the atom
                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture