Slashdot Mirror


The Book of SCSI, 2nd Edition

Craig Maloney contributes the below review of a book he claims is long overdue -- the second edition of Gary Feld's The Book of SCSI. Probably it won't be long until someone is reviewing The Book of Firewire, but SCSI remains probably the most widespread standard for high-quality, reasonably priced storage. I know it's gotten better since the last time I struggled with termination issues and bad cables, but if you rely on SCSI every day, you may need this book.

The Book of SCSI, 2nd Edition: I/O for the New Millennium author Gary Field, Peter M. Ridge pages 456 publisher No Starch Press rating 7.5 reviewer Craig Maloney ISBN 1-886411-10-7 summary A one stop resource for the SCSI protocol.

What's Good? For those in a hurry, Appendix A (The All-Platform Technical Reference) is the entire book in a nutshell. I think Appendix A should be included with every SCSI card sold. It includes pin-out descriptions of the major and not-so-major SCSI interfaces, tables for bus timings, and a quick description of termination rules. The pages that surround Appendix A are also quite good.

The chapter on connecting devices to a PC talks at length about one of the more troubling aspects of SCSI; termination. Anyone who has had to troubleshoot SCSI installation problems will enjoy how thorough Chapter 6 deals with troubleshooting. (It even includes what a SCSI signal should look like on an oscilloscope). Programmers will find a Chapter with information on programming using ASPI, as well as protocol specifications for those looking for more low-level information. You'd be very hard pressed to find a more complete and readable treatment of the SCSI protocol than this book.

What's Bad? Unfortunately completeness can lead to information overload. Novice users will find themselves at a disadvantage with the sheer amount of material presented.

When discussing how to set up a SCSI adapter, the book mentions the various PC busses from the earliest IBM PC to draft revisions of PCI and everything in-between. Had I been a novice reader, I would have been overwhelmed with all the information about historical PC busses that are no longer in use. (When was the last time you used VLB or EISA?) In the interest of completeness, the authors also include a chart comparing these interfaces. I question whether this is really necessary. Some may also be put off by the hand-drawn diagrams in the earlier chapters.

On the CD

The CD includes items such as the SCSI FAQ, ASPI Development Files, ASPI tar, SCSI disk driver source for MSDOS, Western Digital SCSI Utilities, SCSITool, Postmark I/O benchmark source code, and Linux SCSI information. Of note, the CD also includes a PDF file of the entire book.

What's in it for me?

The Book of SCSI is definitely written by SCSI enthusiasts. On the early pages, the authors include a bit of SCSI poetry, and the CD includes a text file entitled "SCSI: A Game With Many Rules and No Rulebook?". This book reads with an excitement only an enthusiast can project. If you have ever been curious about SCSI, I encourage you to sit down and read the first few chapters of this book. If you are in a position to use SCSI components more than occasionally, I recommend you purchase this book and keep it on your reference shelf for those times when troubleshooting is necessary.

My biggest complaint? I wish the authors had written this book ten years ago. However, it is still a welcome addition to my library today.

  • Chapter Listing
  • Chapter 1: Welcome to SCSI
  • Chapter 1.5: A Cornucopia of SCSI Devices
  • Chapter 2: A Look at SCSI-3
  • Chapter 3: SCSI Anatomy
  • Chapter 4: Adding SCSI to Your PC
  • Chapter 5: How to Connect Your SCSI Hardware
  • Chapter 6: Troubleshooting Your SCSI Installation
  • Chapter 7: How the Bus Works
  • Chapter 8: Understanding Device Drivers
  • Chapter 9: Performance Tuning Your SCSI Subsystem
  • Chapter 10: RAID: redundant Array of Independent Disks
  • Chapter 11: A Profile of ASPI Programming
  • Chapter 12: The Future of SCSI and Storage in General
  • Appendix A: All-Platform Technical Reference
  • Appendix B: PC Technical Reference
  • Appendix C: A Look at SCSI Test Equipment
  • Appendix D: ATA/IDE versus SCSI
  • Appendix E: A Small ASPI Demo Application
  • Glossary
  • Index

You can purchase this book at Fatbrain.

148 comments

  1. robbie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    ROB MALDA IS A cock sucking MOTHER fucker wjho suckscksvcjasfdkjsa fucksdfasfskdalfasdfk rob malda sucks cocks for a living!!!!

    1. Re:robbie by fmaxwell · · Score: 0

      Bravo for you clever, witty, and well-crafted insult. Rob Malda must have been cut to the bone to discover that you, an Anonymous Coward, felt that way about him. You, sir, are a wit not to be underestimated.

    2. Re:robbie by norculf · · Score: 1

      If you had a terminator on your SCSI bus you wouldn't be getting data corruption like that.

  2. SCSI by crumbz · · Score: 1

    Has been my favorite drive interface since ~1986. Once you get used to the quirks and setup non-sense, it is very reliable and FAST. Fuck IDE and that garbage, you want multiple drives in your machine this is the way to go.
    Ultra Fast Wide LVD SCSI-3!!!

    my 2 cents...

    1. Re:SCSI by glam0006 · · Score: 1

      Unless money is an issue, of course.. IDE drives/controllers are dirt cheap.

    2. Re:SCSI by Psiren · · Score: 2

      Yes they are. And this anoys me greatly. Is it really that SCSI parts are twice as expensive to manufacture? I doubt it. Its more likely that they want to keep a large prices difference between them so they can justify SCSI=better. Which it is.

    3. Re:SCSI by sbryant · · Score: 1

      Is it really that SCSI parts are twice as expensive to manufacture?

      I know that IBM manufactures the same hardware for IDE and SCSI. With the exception of a small part of the external circuitry (ie: connector etc) and the EEPROM contents, they are the same.

      Companies charge a larger markup on SCSI devices because they can. They're "not consumer" devices - they're more for specialists etc..

      Chicken and egg! I know the retail volume is lower, but if someone came out with a SCSI drive at an "IDE" price, I think it would change.

      Quick comparison from the local store:

      IDE: IBM Deskstar 60GXP 60.0GB UDMA100 7200rpm 8.5msec 2MB DM 430
      SCSI: IBM Ultrastar 36LP 36.9GB Ultra160 7200rpm 6.8msec 4MB DM 730
      SCSI: IBM Ultrastar 36LZX 36.9GB Ultra160 10000rpm 4.9msec 4MB DM 960

      It's not just the size! There's no question which is faster, and I know SCSI has less overhead/more bandwidth etc, but for most of us it's not worth it. I wonder why we don't see larger lower-speed SCSI drives. (Those two are the largest ones any shop around here has to offer.)

      -- Steve

    4. Re:SCSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the improvement of the 36LZX performance is the much higher rotation speed; the comparison of the first two drives is a more valid one.

    5. Re:SCSI by palfreman · · Score: 1
      SCSI drives are manufactured with a 2% error tolerance on the disk. That means that up to 2% of the disk can be bad sectors in the factory format, and it can still be shipped.

      IDE drives are manufactured with a 40% error tolerance - up to 40% of the disk can be bad and the drive can still be sold.

      This makes forces SCSI disks to be more reliable, simply by natural selection - disks not good enough to be SCSI can always be downgraded to IDE and sold on. Also, the manufacturing have to be much higher.

      Because these disks are so much better made and more reliable, it is safe to spin them faster and bash the heads about quicker. Hence the much higher performance of SCSI disks to IDE, even when the electronics inside may be the same.

  3. mother cock sucker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    ROB MALDA IS STLIL A COCK SUCKING MOTHER FUCKERGRETGRERETRETGEATGasfdkdasj skjfasdkfjdas kjdasfkdasjf kdasjfsdak asdkfasdkfdasfa asdf

  4. fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    fuck mackga. fuck cm. fuck es. fuck you all giz niggers. fuck you. fuck you. fuck you.

  5. 75% Crappy posts... by CheapScott · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's a sad time when 75% of the posts are just crap posts! Knock it off, guys! Sheesh!!!

    1. Re:75% Crappy posts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me think about it.. uhm, no!

    2. Re:75% Crappy posts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a typical short person, totally malignant.

    3. Re:75% Crappy posts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was following your post for the fine example it is. Why, it's topical, well-written and doesn't suck. Now where did I put my crack pipe?

  6. WTF? by crumbz · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Where is the fucking moderation in /.

  7. Quick Resolution: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your drive is so Scuzy, why not just clean it?!?!?!

    Nyuck nyuck nyuck.

  8. Windows XP SCSI support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I've been running Windows XP for the last couple of weeks, and have found it to be amazingly fast and stable. The interface is clean and intuitive. SCSI devices (I have 3) are handled with grace and efficiency. On continuously since I installed it with zero downtime and zero blue screens. Truly an amazing desktop OS, maybe the best ever!

    1. Re:Windows XP SCSI support by crumbz · · Score: 1

      Please do not give anymore $$$ to M$ or they will win the economic victory conditions a la Alpha Centauri.

    2. Re:Windows XP SCSI support by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiosity, I heard that XP has virtually no USB support. Is this true? Have you had any problems using generic USB drivers?

    3. Re:Windows XP SCSI support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...or they will win the economic victory conditions a la Alpha Centauri."

      ?? What kind of nonsense is this?

    4. Re:Windows XP SCSI support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL i know right! some of these slashbots are so fricken ridiculous it's actually funny haha.

    5. Re:Windows XP SCSI support by geolane · · Score: 1

      My understanding was that Microsoft supported firewire rather than USB 2.0, since the former was available, and the second still in the lab and press release ether.

    6. Re:Windows XP SCSI support by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Yes, but does it carry support for the current USB tech?

  9. Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Windows XP has excellent support for SCSI devies, as well as USB and Firewire. From mp3 players to scanners and webcams, Windows XP supports it. And there now there's no need to reboot to install drivers (no need to recompile you're kernel either!). Windows XP is a revolution in computing, ease of use, stability, multimedia, Windows XP has it all.

    1. Re:Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Can't wait to pick up my copy! Yeaaah baby!

    2. Re:Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Why pick it up when you can download it for free from here

      ?

    3. Re:Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      What is THAT? It looks somewhat like a human rectum but it's way too large...

    4. Re:Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Funny that the above link was to Microsoft. You must have accidentally decided to go to goatse.cx and thought you were clicking the Microsoft.com URL.

    5. Re:Yup by well_jung · · Score: 1
      Windows XP has excellent support for SCSI devies, as well as USB and Firewire. From mp3 players to scanners and webcams, Windows XP supports it. And there now there's no need to reboot to install drivers (no need to recompile you're kernel either!). Windows XP is a revolution in computing, ease of use, stability, multimedia, Windows XP has it all.

      Haven't used the MacOS in a the last few years, have you? As I recall, Apple had built-in suport for SCSI in 1986, Firewire (an Apple Trademark, BTW, it's 1394 in Windows)in 1996, and USB in 1998.

      Not that I use it anymore, but Apple was a few years ahead of MS where connectivity and multimedia are concerned.

      But then, you are just trolling, anyway...

      --
      Carl G. Jung
      --
      "With one breath, with one flow, You will know Synchronicity" -La Policia
    6. Re:Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple had built-in 5Mbs 25-pin SCSI in 1986. In 1998 they were still shipping machines with built-in 5Mbs 25-pin SCSI! It's a good thing they dropped it, because they certainly weren't doing it right.

    7. Re:Yup by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Mac's have the only scsi controllers (older macs actually) where performance is rated in 100's of k per second (read on a Apple TIL article).

    8. Re:Yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you on drugs? get a grip. You must realise this is absolute crap...

  10. Chapter list by Monte · · Score: 4, Funny

    Which chapter has the instructions for sacrificing the goat?

    1. Re:Chapter list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      those can be found on goatse.cx

    2. Re:Chapter list by hal200 · · Score: 1

      That would almost certainly fit under 'Termination'. ;)

      --

      I just want to take over the world...Why does that automatically make me EVIL?

  11. Secsi? by Kasreyn · · Score: 2

    Funny, I've always heard it pronounced "scuzzy". =P

    Perhaps there are even more ways? Feel free to reply with weird pronunciations you've heard.

    -Kasreyn

    --
    Kasreyn: Cheerfully playing the part of Devil's Advocate to hairtrigger /. flamers since 1999.
    1. Re:Secsi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pronounce it "Es See Es Eye".

    2. Re:Secsi? by jedwards · · Score: 1

      scoozy

    3. Re:Secsi? by aussersterne · · Score: 2

      Hmmm... Everyone I know pronounces it SCSI, too, but 'secsi' might not be a bad idea. After all, SCSI evolved from SASI (Shugart Associates System Interface) which is pronounced "sassy" if I remember correctly.

      "sexy and sassy" go together better than "scuzzy and sassy" in my opinion.

      *shrug*

      --
      STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    4. Re:Secsi? by Danger+Fan · · Score: 1

      it is pronounced scuzzi.

      Secsi is pronounced sexy.

      he's just trying to be funny

    5. Re:Secsi? by crleaf · · Score: 1

      Is that like pronouncing Jello Jay Ee El El Oh? It's always been SCSI = scuzzy. :)

    6. Re:Secsi? by CmdrTaco+on · · Score: 0
      Secsi == Sexy

      Must be a foriegn conpect for you. Or maybe you're just foriegn.

      --

      saru mo ki kara ochiru

    7. Re:Secsi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      saying it like that is one way to get laughed ut of an interview.

  12. I WANT A BLOWJOB. NOW!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    SUCK MY COCK!!! Unless you're female. Women are terrible at giving blowjobs.

    Jon Katz

    1. Re:I WANT A BLOWJOB. NOW!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      If you really are JonKatz, what you want is a nice 15-year-old boy.

  13. Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Someone writes an updated book on CmdrTaco's personal hygiene habits..

  14. Random Lameness Generator Beats Lameness Filter! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    csctvjdcxi
    hrdorpvwfp
    qubwmtenwt
    ofjjjlebes
    aahjkgsbvo
    ghqfiotelf
    wlvvkbjdfr
    fkhpoblwsr
    wgnxrvigtu
    lvxdwnrrqs
    fimcihpqso
    bifwnoanpw
    umsggtxerc
    remamrpxpc
    sxcagnuaaf
    qndetwhkfu
    ssrunqtdpp
    wstpdqgfvq
    bvqxeutooc
    gmbkalubut
    qaxjmrtsxh
    hrswjaovmp
    aexnlllngd
    gujcjlmiuj
    aqojsokqvn
    nhbnxfmdlf
    htnmjsqdna
    dbhipbbgki
    vfnxifaptt
    svokoekjrt
    uqelhaprcp
    raeouoivhg
    tltmocourb
    akuieciqwi
    dhsqfgvgjn
    iwcdcepsvl
    rracdalsph
    xakxbhgweq
    qeiodmdowk
    wdajbmejmk
    pxgkkpbxno
    fhqupgeedf
    xcfnbbidfb
    mcqphblgcj
    nffxxmqwlu
    kvglgeckjt
    mrtsxhhrsw
    jaovmpaexn
    lllngdgujc
    jlmiujaqoj
    sokqvnnhbn
    xfmdlfhtnm
    jsqdnadbhi
    pbbgkivfnx
    ifapttsvok
    oekjrtuqel
    haprcpraeo
    uoivhgtltm
    ocourbakui
    eciqwidhsq
    fgvgjniwcd
    cepsvlrrac
    dalsphxakx
    bhgweqqeio
    dmdowkwdaj
    bmejmkpxgk
    kpbxnofhqu
    pgeedfxcfn
    bbidfbmcqp
    hblgcjnffx
    xmqwlukvgl
    geckjtmrts
    xhhrswjaov
    mpaexnllln
    gdgujcjlmi
    ujaqojsokq
    vnnhbnxfmd
    lfhtnmjsqd
    nadbhipbbg
    kivfnxifap
    ttsvokoekj
    rtuqelhapr
    cpraeouoiv
    hgtltmocou
    rbakuieciq
    widhsqfgvg
    jniwcdceps
    vlrracdals
    phxakxbhgw
    eqqeiodmdo
    wkwdajbmej
    mkpxgkkpbx
    nofhqupgee
    dfxcfnbbid
    fbmcqphblg
    cjnffxxmqw
    lukvglgeck
    jtmrtsxhhr
    swjaovmpae
    xnlllngdgu
    jcjlmiujaq
    ojsokqvnnh
    bnxfmdlfht
    nmjsqdnaqo
    tvenotxvkr
    clusndiihj
    cxdrxwghjf
    qxunefpegm
    rdjdvjutia
    ibdpdigonx
    jvrpuelvpu
    hestktwbul
    ppprehkagg
    npqmahdumn
    wmouskrefr
    vdqbpclxlq
    nwoarwbxem
    twxdombcru
    fjetqrqslo
    sbonvqrobp
    fetoatpvcs
    smmbfkxixk
    sasroxviaf
    igmuughlwn
    dkbenqmcaa
    xctqtjvpwa
    bvjwmfdwhd
    wfkccuncms
    bqasthcbwg
    fqcnqotven
    otxvkrclus
    ndiihjcxdr
    xwghjfqxun
    efpegmrdjd
    vjutiaibdp
    digonxjvrp
    uelvpuhest
    ktwbulpppr
    ehkaggnpqm
    ahdumnwmou
    skrefrvdqb
    pclxlqnwoa
    rwbxemtwxd
    ombcrufjet
    qrqslosbon
    vqrobpfeto
    atpvcssmmb
    fkxixksasr
    oxviafigmu
    ughlwndkbe
    nqmcaaxctq
    tjvpwabvjw
    mfdwhdwfkc
    cuncmsbqas
    thcbwgfqcn
    qotvenotxv
    krclusndii
    hjcxdrxwgh
    jfqxunefpe
    gmrdjdvjut
    iaibdpdigo
    nxjvrpuelv
    puhestktwb
    ulppprehka
    ggnpqmahdu
    mnwmouskre
    frvdqbpclx
    lqnwoarwbx
    emtwxdombc
    rufjetqrqs
    losbonvqro
    bpfetoatpv
    cssmmbfkxi
    xksasroxvi
    afigmuughl
    wndkbenqmc
    aaxctqtjvp
    wabvjwmfdw
    hdwfkccunc
    msbqasthcb
    wgfqcnqotv
    enotxvkrcl
    usndiihjcx
    drxwghjfqx
    unefpuwejt
    btnbmlapxr
    thtavgepbm
    jhmudnhmwu
    klclnrmdhh
    gjtxcqwwfh
    ieqxtmefod
    fmkcjuujnt
    irhscodifn
    gqjoqpuelo
    ptgersjmvb
    ukiiikdgkr
    gfnijfrgvu
    lgplhnskke
    equcpapckq
    kjgpnaqvaw
    dlmwwdofsc
    rufidsqqps
    lhlbngoqrn
    boevtnxtov
    brrlfsekqi
    qjlxsrowvh
    rfhglntfgk
    pmcjsdmjft
    xaxbspsioo
    vxavipmeuv
    huwejtbtnb
    mlapxrthta
    vgepbmjhmu
    dnhmwuklcl
    nrmdhhgjtx
    cqwwfhieqx
    tmefodfmkc
    juujntirhs
    codifngqjo
    qpueloptge
    rsjmvbukii
    ikdgkrgfni
    jfrgvulgpl
    hnskkeequc
    papckqkjgp
    naqvawdlmw
    wdofscrufi
    dsqqpslhlb
    ngoqrnboev
    tnxtovbrrl
    fsekqiqjlx
    srowvhrfhg
    lntfgkpmcj
    sdmjftxaxb
    spsioovxav
    ipmeuvhuwe
    jtbtnbmlap
    xrthtavgep
    bmjhmudnhm
    wuklclnrmd
    hhgjtxcqww
    fhieqxtmef
    odfmkcjuuj
    ntirhscodi
    fngqjoqpue
    loptgersjm
    vbukiiikdg
    krgfnijfrg
    vulgplhnsk
    keequcpapc
    kqkjgpnaqv
    awdlmwwdof
    scrufidsqq
    pslhlbngoq
    rnboevtnxt
    ovbrrlfsek
    qiqjlxsrow
    vhrfhglntf
    gkpmcjsdmj
    ftxaxbspsi
    oovxavipme
    uvhuwejthb
    tisrgwgxbn
    bhemlvhtpn
    tdjtosfcqr
    iruxtjnonp
    cfiweelnol
    wfcsklvkms
    rjpddptbox
    nbjvjolumx
    puxvckruvc
    mkaaqsdhcr
    ppoqjnqamm
    toqmxndcsm
    wrntaqqkkx
    djwhviqwrp
    nvugxegeks
    sefjulbixc
    lpkawwwaro
    rhunuwxthu
    kdbufbvdia
    asmakqxowq
    sgaxufdoal
    omrtcmmrvt
    iqaksqlcgg
    fibvbpvueg
    hdovslcdnc
    elpbhbtisr
    gwgxbnbhem
    lvhtpntdjt
    osfcqrirux
    tjnonpcfiw
    eelnolwfcs
    klvkmsrjpd
    dptboxnbjv
    jolumxpuxv
    ckruvcmkaa
    qsdhcrppoq
    jnqammtoqm
    xndcsmwrnt
    aqqkkxdjwh
    viqwrpnvug
    xegekssefj
    ulbixclpka
    wwwarorhun
    uwxthukdbu
    fbvdiaasma
    kqxowqsgax
    ufdoalomrt
    cmmrvtiqak
    sqlcggfibv
    bpvueghdov
    slcdncelpb
    hbtisrgwgx
    bnbhemlvht
    pntdjtosfc
    qriruxtjno
    npcfiweeln
    olwfcsklvk
    msrjpddptb
    oxnbjvjolu
    mxpuxvckru
    vcmkaaqsdh
    crppoqjnqa
    mmtoqmxndc
    smwrntaqqk
    kxdjwhviqw
    rpnvugxege
    kssefjulbi
    xclpkawwwa
    rorhunuwxt
    hukdbufbvd
    iaasmakqxo
    wqsgaxufdo
    alomrtcmmr
    vtiqaksqlc
    ggfinkndjj
    rsuqdkhxpq
    cprxeouoiu
    hgtltmocot
    qbakuhechp
    wichspfgvg
    imhwccceps
    vlrracdxls
    ohxajwbhfv
    eppeiodmcn
    wkwdajblej
    lkpxgjkobx
    mnehqupgde
    dfwbfmbaid
    ebmbqpgblg
    cinffxxmqv
    ktkvflfebk
    itlqtrxghr
    rwjaovmpad
    xnllkngdgu
    icjlmiujxq
    ojsojqvnmh
    anxfmdlfgs
    nmjrqcnadb
    gipabfkive
    nwhfaottsu
    nkndjjrsuq
    dkhxpqcprx
    eouoiuhgtl
    tmocotqbak
    uhechpwich
    spfgvgimhw
    cccepsvlrr
    acdxlsohxa
    jwbhfveppe
    iodmcnwkwd
    ajblejlkpx
    gjkobxmneh
    qupgdedfwb
    fmbaidebmb
    qpgblgcinf
    fxxmqvktkv
    flfebkitlq
    trxghrrwja
    ovmpadxnll
    kngdguicjl
    miujxqojso
    jqvnmhanxf
    mdlfgsnmjr
    qcnadbgipa
    bfkivenwhf
    aottsunknd
    jjrsuqdkhx
    pqcprxeouo
    iuhgtltmoc
    otqbakuhec
    hpwichspfg
    vgimhwccce
    psvlrracdx
    lsohxajwbh
    fveppeiodm
    cnwkwdajbl
    ejlkpxgjko
    bxmnehqupg
    dedfwbfmba
    idebmbqpgb
    lgcinffxxm
    qvktkvflfe
    bkitlqtrxg
    hrrwjaovmp
    adxnllkwqm
    qgsltuwsft
    jcasextcgw
    wqkxjpvnvo
    qexvtdcmwk
    mlqraklpur
    hoxirojaef
    egxuxnttce
    fbnurjbclb
    djoagasgqq
    fuewamafcl
    jugromrbis
    mqdbppgqsw
    rimmloadhv
    dckmnjvear
    iktikrphnb
    bosxmwmxht
    hnkslvnsvt
    bjptualjwx
    orcgbpnnnp
    ilowkksnok
    wlbaqluqms
    xppjjvbhuf
    uhpvpoltsf
    vcfdiqrddi
    tkxhwbjnix
    vvuwqmqgsl
    tuwsftjcas
    extcgwwqkx
    jpvnvoqexv
    tdcmwkmlqr
    aklpurhoxi
    rojaefegxu
    xnttcefbnu
    rjbclbdjoa
    gasgqqfuew
    amafcljugr
    omrbismqdb
    ppgqswrimm
    loadhvdckm
    njvearikti
    krphnbbosx
    mwmxhthnks
    lvnsvtbjpt
    ualjwxorcg
    bpnnnpilow
    kksnokwlba
    qluqmsxppj
    jvbhufuhpv
    poltsfvcfd
    iqrdditkxh
    wbjnixvvuw
    qmqgsltuws
    ftjcasextc
    gwwqkxjpvn
    voqexvtdcm
    wkmlqraklp
    urhoxiroja
    efegxuxntt
    cefbnurjbc
    lbdjoagasg
    qqfuewamaf
    cljugromrb
    ismqdbppgq
    swrimmload
    hvdckmnjve
    ariktikrph
    nbbosxmwmx
    hthnkslvns
    vtbjptualj
    wxorcgbecc
    bevadlxxgc
    dxlaonfajf
    ahledvwkou
    jsitejedai
    hrkpsqvffp
    quhwmtknwc
    vmjkjlebes
    hahjkhsiwo
    mhrmiotllf
    xlwdkbkdfr
    lkhqoblwbx
    fgnxaeigud
    mvgdwnrrrt
    mjmciiprso
    cjfwopanpw
    dmtngtffsj
    rlmanspxwj
    tgcbgovhbf
    qodetehlgu
    bbacnqukqp
    xacwjqngvw
    ivxfeucood
    gmbkbmuiub
    xhxkchkiov
    eiinavlmdg
    psneccbeva
    dlxxgcdxla
    onfajfahle
    dvwkoujsit
    ejedaihrkp
    sqvffpquhw
    mtknwcvmjk
    jlebeshahj
    khsiwomhrm
    iotllfxlwd
    kbkdfrlkhq
    oblwbxfgnx
    aeigudmvgd
    wnrrrtmjmc
    iiprsocjfw
    opanpwdmtn
    gtffsjrlma
    nspxwjtgcb
    govhbfqode
    tehlgubbac
    nqukqpxacw
    jqngvwivxf
    eucoodgmbk
    bmuiubxhxk
    chkioveiin
    avlmdgpsne
    ccbevadlxx
    gcdxlaonfa
    jfahledvwk
    oujsitejed
    aihrkpsqvf
    fpquhwmtkn
    wcvmjkjleb
    eshahjkhsi
    womhrmiotl
    lfxlwdkbkd
    frlkhqoblw
    bxfgnxaeig
    udmvgdwnrr
    rtmjmciipr
    socjfwopan
    pwdmtngtff
    sjruwkwdaj
    hsepmkpxgq
    kpbxnofoqu
    pgkkjmwcft
    bbiklhtcwp
    hirgipnfmx
    xmqwlukvfr
    gliqjtmrts
    xhorswjhuv
    mpaexnllln
    gjnujiqlmi
    ujxxojsokq
    vnnhhtxfsd
    sfntnmjsqd
    tadbgopbbg
    rivfuxilgv
    ttsvokoeqj
    rtuqerhawq
    cwraeuuoiv
    hntltmocvu
    rbakuikjoq
    wijnspfmvg
    pmiwcdcevs
    vlrracdals
    phxakxbhmw
    ewqepodscu
    wkwdajhsep
    mkpxgqkpbx
    nofoqupgkk
    jmwcftbbik
    lhtcwphirg
    ipnfmxxmqw
    lukvfrgliq
    jtmrtsxhor
    swjhuvmpae
    xnlllngjnu
    jiqlmiujxx
    ojsokqvnnh
    htxfsdsfnt
    nmjsqdtadb
    gopbbgrivf
    uxilgvttsv
    okoeqjrtuq
    erhawqcwra
    euuoivhntl
    tmocvurbak
    uikjoqwijn
    spfmvgpmiw
    cdcevsvlrr
    acdalsphxa
    kxbhmwewqe
    podscuwkwd
    ajhsepmkpx
    gqkpbxnofo
    qupgkkjmwc
    ftbbiklhtc
    wphirgipnf
    mxxmqwlukv
    frgliqjtmr
    tsxhorswjh
    uvmpaexnll
    lngjnujiql
    miujxxojso
    kqvnnhhtxf
    sdsfntnmjs
    qdtadbgopb
    bsfvkrilua
    tkiihjcxdr
    fwghjfqgun
    lfpkgmrjjd
    vjuciaibdp
    jifonxjvxv
    delvwchesb
    ktebulpppr
    khkaggnpqm
    ahdumnwlou
    bkrlerddqh
    pjlxlqnwuh
    reaxemtfxd
    ombcrdfjet
    xxwblosion
    vwauholetu
    gtvecsammb
    fkxixksgsx
    vfviafigmt
    cghlwtjkbe
    nqmcaaxctw
    bjvveabvjw
    mldwhdwfkc
    buuimshqgs
    chcbwgfpin
    qotdenosfv
    kriluatkii
    hjcxdrfwgh
    jfqgunlfpk
    gmrjjdvjuc
    iaibdpjifo
    nxjvxvdelv
    wchesbkteb
    ulppprkhka
    ggnpqmahdu
    mnwloubkrl
    erddqhpjlx
    lqnwuhreax
    emtfxdombc
    rdfjetxxwb
    losionvwau
    holetugtve
    csammbfkxi
    xksgsxvfvi
    afigmtcghl
    wtjkbenqmc
    aaxctwbjvv
    eabvjwmldw
    hdwfkcbuui
    mshqgschcb
    wgfpinqotd
    enosfvkril
    uatkiihjcx
    drfwghjfqg
    unlfpkgmrj
    jdvjuciaib
    dpjifonxjv
    xvdelvwche
    sbktebulpp
    prkhkaggnp
    qmahdumnwl
    oubkrlerdd
    qhpjlxlqnw
    uhreaxemtf
    xnawlmdmpt
    oeijikvadr
    xxhikgravn
    fgqfhnmekw
    wkoujsjueq
    ejgphskpsq
    vfmqqviftu
    lowcvmkkjl
    filthhojlh
    siwvnhrmip
    tllffswerc
    qdmrmkiqpb
    sxbafnnxae
    pgudsvgkfu
    rsrtmjmcpi
    prsocpgwup
    auqwdttnht
    glsjrlnbts
    pawjtgjhno
    vhhmqoeltf
    olgvbbadur
    ukqpxbcwkr
    ngvxivxglu
    cvodnnbrbs
    uiucxhgqdo
    kioweojnaw
    lmdmptoeij
    ikvadrxxhi
    kgravnfgqf
    hnmekwwkou
    jsjueqejgp
    hskpsqvfmq
    qviftulowc
    vmkkjlfilt
    hhojlhsiwv
    nhrmiptllf
    fswercqdmr
    mkiqpbsxba
    fnnxaepgud
    svgkfursrt
    mjmcpiprso
    cpgwupauqw
    dttnhtglsj
    rlnbtspawj
    tgjhnovhhm
    qoeltfolgv
    bbadurukqp
    xbcwkrngvx
    ivxglucvod
    nnbrbsuiuc
    xhgqdokiow
    eojnawlmdm
    ptoeijikva
    drxxhikgra
    vnfgqfhnme
    kwwkoujsju
    eqejgphskp
    sqvfmqqvif
    tulowcvmkk
    jlfilthhoj
    lhsiwvnhrm
    iptllffswe
    rcqdmrmkiq
    pbsxomsccm
    nretjqhktx
    sigggibwbp
    dveghdpesl
    jenjflqiic
    tisahwgacn
    ihemlwitwu
    bdkuubfdqa
    ircatjoonp
    jfjxfemnpl
    wfctklvkmt
    xjpjdqcbog
    ohjvjomutf
    pdxvdkrdvc
    nkabqbehcr
    vvvxknqgmm
    tvwsgnkcst
    esucarxklx
    djwhvirfrw
    teugxehfks
    befjushixc
    lpkbwxwaru
    ahutdwxuhv
    lkbugbvdia
    asshlqfofq
    agaxufdogl
    omsccmnret
    jqhktxsigg
    gibwbpdveg
    hdpesljenj
    flqiictisa
    hwgacnihem
    lwitwubdku
    ubfdqairca
    tjoonpjfjx
    femnplwfct
    klvkmtxjpj
    dqcbogohjv
    jomutfpdxv
    dkrdvcnkab
    qbehcrvvvx
    knqgmmtvws
    gnkcstesuc
    arxklxdjwh
    virfrwteug
    xehfksbefj
    ushixclpkb
    wxwaruahut
    dwxuhvlkbu
    gbvdiaassh
    lqfofqagax
    ufdoglomsc
    cmnretjqhk
    txsigggibw
    bpdveghdpe
    sljenjflqi
    ictisahwga
    cnihemlwit
    wubdkuubfd
    qaircatjoo
    npjfjxfemn
    plwfctrsdq
    sbgpwqjwii
    vmuopdqvsc
    bmwjfejraj
    eitrghwhko
    jxeedfqtxn
    tscdfbmtqj
    ablacihxfr
    rfjpenepxl
    xeckcnfknl
    rahllqdaop
    gjsvqhffeh
    adgoccjfgc
    odrqidmidk
    ohgabnrxmv
    lwhmhgdlku
    nsvtaiistx
    kbpwnqbfap
    mnmohehvkd
    kmnkvlbrpk
    uplrwooico
    bgnengiuon
    ktreobecij
    qcdhljxgpa
    jgbquutwpm
    pfllsuvrfm
    ibrsdqsbgp
    wqjwiivmuo
    pdqvscbmwj
    fejrajeitr
    ghwhkojxee
    dfqtxntscd
    fbmtqjabla
    cihxfrrfjp
    enepxlxeck
    cnfknlrahl
    lqdaopgjsv
    qhffehadgo
    ccjfgcodrq
    idmidkohga
    bnrxmvlwhm
    hgdlkunsvt
    aiistxkbpw
    nqbfapmnmo
    hehvkdkmnk
    vlbrpkuplr
    wooicobgne
    ngiuonktre
    obecijqcdh
    ljxgpajgbq
    uutwpmpfll
    suvrfmibrs
    dqsbgpwqjw
    iivmuopdqv
    scbmwjfejr
    ajeitrghwh
    kojxeedfqt
    xntscdfbmt
    qjablacihx
    frrfjpenep
    xlxeckcnfk
    ndiqxcdhsq
    ggvajnixvv
    uwptwgssbu
    wsftjiasex
    tbgwwqqfjp
    endowexvtd
    cmfkmkqaak
    lpcrhofirv
    qgeeegxuxn
    btcefbncqj
    hclhdjogga
    rgqwfuewam
    gfcljugrus
    xbissxdbow
    gqawrimmlo
    hdhvdcklnj
    udarijtikr
    vhnhboaxme
    mfhthnksrd
    nbvtbjpbua
    liwxoxcfbp
    tutviloekk
    rtureliaqr
    dqsaxpvjjv
    bhufthpdpu
    rcsfvcfdiq
    xcdhsqggva
    jnixvvuwpt
    wgssbuwsft
    jiasextbgw
    wqqfjpendo
    wexvtdcmfk
    mkqaaklpcr
    hofirvqgee
    egxuxnbtce
    fbncqjhclh
    djoggargqw
    fuewamgfcl
    jugrusxbis
    sxdbowgqaw
    rimmlohdhv
    dcklnjudar
    ijtikrvhnh
    boaxmemfht
    hnksrdnbvt
    bjpbualiwx
    oxcfbptutv
    iloekkrtur
    eliaqrdqsa
    xpvjjvbhuf
    thpdpurcsf
    vcfdiqxcdh
    sqggvajnix
    vvuwptwgss
    buwsftjias
    extbgwwqqf
    jpendowexv
    tdcmfkmkqa
    aklpcrudsv
    gjetrrqtmj
    mcoiprsocp
    fwupaupwdt
    sngtflsjrk
    matspxwitg
    jhmoughlqo
    dktenlguab
    actqtjppxa
    cwjqnfvwiv
    xfkucuocnm
    brbsuiubwh
    gqcnkinveo
    inavlmdmos
    neiiikvadr
    xxgijfraun
    fgpehnldkv
    vkoujsiteq
    ejgohrkprq
    vfmpquhfst
    knwcvmjkjl
    ehlshgojkg
    shwvmhqmio
    tllffswdqb
    qdlrlkhqob
    rwbxfmnxxe
    pgudsvgjet
    rrqtmjmcoi
    prsocpfwup
    aupwdtsngt
    flsjrkmats
    pxwitgjhmo
    ughlqodkte
    nlguabactq
    tjppxacwjq
    nfvwivxfku
    cuocnmbrbs
    uiubwhgqcn
    kinveoinav
    lmdmosneii
    ikvadrxxgi
    jfraunfgpe
    hnldkvvkou
    jsiteqejgo
    hrkprqvfmp
    quhfstknwc
    vmjkjlehls
    hgojkgshwv
    mhqmiotllf
    fswdqbqdlr
    lkhqobrwbx
    fmnxxepgud
    svgjetrrqt
    mjmcoiprso
    cpfwupaupw
    dtsngtflsj
    rkmatspxwi
    tgjhmoughl
    qodktenlgu
    klkmfcftbb
    iklhtcxphi
    rhjpugmgam
    wwlckegsgl
    irpcmxusxh
    oaswjhvvmw
    aexossrugj
    ndjiqstpdk
    gxoqboqxvn
    thhuafsesf
    nbntqardta
    dbhpvbcgrp
    efuximhvtt
    tvorueqqxt
    uqerhgwrcw
    safvvppdhn
    clcnvcvurb
    aldiljowxj
    jobqfnehpt
    ofddcewswm
    arbcealbpi
    gakfbimeew
    qfpvdtduwk
    fdbjiseqs

  15. Termination by Carl+Drougge · · Score: 2, Informative

    What's so difficult about termination anyway? Terminate both ends of the bus, nothing else. If you have both internal and external devices, check if your controlles uses the same or separate buses for them. That seems to be it to me..

    1. Re:Termination by fmaxwell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's so difficult about termination anyway? Terminate both ends of the bus, nothing else.

      If only it was that simple... Some controllers and devices are incredibly picky about the quality of the termination, refusing to work reliably with anything but the best quality active termination. Then you have SCSI devices of varying bus widths and you have to terminate on half of the data bus or the other. Asus made the P2B-S motherboard with built-in SCSI and it was nigh on impossible to determine how it worked. You could toggle termination in the driver and it seemed to have no effect. Automatic termination, despite being listed, apparently did not work. You could toggle the low byte single-ended termination on and off at the motherboard but there was no way to turn off the high byte termination. The list went on and on. FAQs were developed by people who tried to reverse-engineer the board. It was a mess.

      Frankly, I think that termination problems with SCSI has had more to do with its demise in high-end consumer PCs than any other factor.

    2. Re:Termination by singularity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And then you get into devices that attempt to have "built-in" termination. Or devices that, for whatever reason, have to be at the end of the chain (due to termination issues) and you need to attach two of them. Or your motherboard (at one end of the bus sometimes) is not providing decent termination.

      And that is not even getting into cable length.

      At one time I had four external SCSI devices attached to my computer. Placement of the four items would cause the chain to work or not. I am not talking about placement on the chain (which can definitely between working and not), but rather on my desk. If I moved the Zip drive too far to the right the chain would fail. If I tried to move the hard drive under the desk the chain would fail.

      Luckily I was running seperate busses for internal and external.

      "There are very technical reason why you need to sacrifice a goat to get your SCSI chain working properly."

      As for the other post - I have always heard is "scuzzy." I always thought that it was appropriate for how messed-up SCSI was. Of course, I would take SCSI over parallel and slow serial any day of the week.

      Now Firewire and USB... I still have too much invested in SCSI to go over just yet. Looks like good specs. Now if they would only keep USB as a low-speed powered bus and not try to get in over their heads I will be fine. I just want something I can attach keyboards, mice, and printers to. Having two seperate busses makes sense (one slower and powered, the other faster). Yes, I understand that Firewire is powered.

      --
      - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
    3. Re:Termination by Monte · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I think that termination problems with SCSI has had more to do with its demise in high-end consumer PCs than any other factor.

      Generally I don't see termination as being any stickier than the master/slave/solo jumpering you do with IDE... but then you occasionally run across some sticky little SOB that's determined to be a pain.

      How's this for termination hell: I bought (at a good price) a large (read: full height) 10G SCSI drive in it's own external case w/ power supplet et al. Great, except it was terminated, it wasn't going to be the last thing on my chain, and the only way to turn off the termination was to open the case and void the manufacturer's warranty.

      It's enough to make you go IDE...

    4. Re:Termination by Captain+Chad · · Score: 1

      It sounds simple, but keep in mind that there are multiple *types* of termination, and different versions of the SCSI standard require different types of termination. It's easy to get confused, and I found the quick-reference table to be invaluable.

      --
      Check out Chad's News
    5. Re:Termination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I do not think that termination is a reason for the decline of SCSI on the consumer market. I think cost is. Most users do not understand the benefits of SCSI. Most users also do not understand that SCSI under Windows 9X/ME is simply useless, and find its performance lackluster because of the lack of OS support.

      Termination has if anything, gotten simpler over the past few years. Devices other than mass storage wide devices are becoming rarer. Few devices other than tape still ship in narror formats.

      Most current HBAs for SCSI cards do an excellent job of auto-termination. With most new SCSI cables shipping with built in multi-mode terminators, the job is even simpler. Removing terminators from LVD devices also simplified the matter.

      There are some instances of designers incorrectly implementing auto-termination schemes, and bus widths, but all in all, a good designer can get it right. The only complexity comes when people do not read documentation. Serialized busses such as SATA and serial SCSI will make life even easier going forward, as all points will require termination.

    6. Re:Termination by fmaxwell · · Score: 2

      There are some instances of designers incorrectly implementing auto-termination schemes, and bus widths, but all in all, a good designer can get it right.

      "Can" is the key word. What is a consumer to do, even a very technically savvy one, when he purchases a SCSI controller and discovers, after weeks of fighting with it, that the designer was not "a good designer"? What does he do when he buys an external chain of SCSI devices (scanner, tape drive, CD cutter, etc.), hooks everything up properly, and it either does not work or is unreliable? That's the dilemma faced by many and I think that it drove people to IDE and caused the price desparity that now exists (there used to be little difference in the price of SCSI and IDE hard drives).

    7. Re:Termination by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Then you have the fact that there's a 8 and 16 bit version of almost every scsi protocol, and most controllers seem to be very picky on what kind of termination you need to have - and depending on the drive.

      I've seen controllers that don't seem to like Seagate and IBM drives on the same bus.

      And heaven help you if for some reason you need to put SCSI-2 narrow devices along side with wide devices.

    8. Re:Termination by Salamander · · Score: 2
      As for the other post - I have always heard is "scuzzy."

      Back in the very early days, when people could still remember SASI, there was actually a debate about whether SCSI should be "scuzzy" or "sexy". The former pronunciation prevailed, and I never thought it was a coincidence. ;-)

      --
      Slashdot - News for Herds. Stuff that Splatters.
    9. Re:Termination by Carl+Drougge · · Score: 1
      Some controllers and devices are incredibly picky about the quality of the termination, refusing to work reliably with anything but the best quality active termination.

      Well, obviously buying the cheap stuff gets you in trouble. But I would think you wouldn't buy SCSI at all if you're picky about the price.. (Unless it's for something like an A3000, which simply needs SCSI, but it works with seriously incorrect termination, so it's still not an issue.. (The A3000 SCSI controller is well known for being picky, but that's about the SCSI-protocol, not termination.))

      Then you have SCSI devices of varying bus widths and you have to terminate on half of the data bus or the other.

      Well.. I suppose my experience is limited to the above mentioned A3000 (with and 8bit bus) and server-type stuff where everything is nicely streamlined and just works. =) (Brand servers)

      Frankly, I think that termination problems with SCSI has had more to do with its demise in high-end consumer PCs than any other factor.

      Make that termination problems with incorrectly designed stuff and bad docs, not SCSI as such, and I might even agree.. =)

    10. Re:Termination by fmaxwell · · Score: 2
      Some controllers and devices are incredibly picky about the quality of the termination, refusing to work reliably with anything but the best quality active termination.

      Well, obviously buying the cheap stuff gets you in trouble. But I would think you wouldn't buy SCSI at all if you're picky about the price..


      Unfortunately, the quality of the termination is seldom something that can be judged by price or even appearance. I had one $30 active terminator that did not work worth a damn with some Adaptec SCSI controllers while some no-name $15 POS worked fine. Go figure.
    11. Re:Termination by __aahyzr9271 · · Score: 1
      At one time I had four external SCSI devices attached to my computer. Placement of the four items would cause the chain to work or not. I am not talking about placement on the chain (which can definitely between working and not), but rather on my desk. If I moved the Zip drive too far to the right the chain would fail. If I tried to move the hard drive under the desk the chain would fail.

      Sounds like you had a bad connection somewhere. Of course, faulty hardware will give you nothing but trouble, no matter what you're running.

      FYI, SCSI doesn't care where a device is phsyicaly on the chain, it only cares about the device's ID. Just make sure the chain is properly terminated, you don't try to make two or mre devices share an ID, and you keep slower devices and faster devices on seperate chains.
    12. Re:Termination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, SCSI doesn't care where a device is phsyicaly on the chain, it only cares about the device's ID.

      Sure, the *protocol* doesn't care about physical location, but it can make a *huge* difference electrically. Because the SCSI bus is multidrop, and because of stubs, and because each load on the bus (or even each unmated connector) creates an impedance mismatch, signal reflections on the bus can have a very real effect on signal quality. It's possible to get enough destructive interference between a signal and its reflections to make a device in the middle of the bus stop working altogether, while the same device at the farthest end from the host adapter works perfectly.

      You have to know these things when you've been designing SCSI devices for 12 years, you know.

    13. Re:Termination by Tycho · · Score: 1

      If only that were true, if only that were true. Apparently you have never tried to terminate the SCSI chain on old Macs. I have had to deal with chains that work fine on an old Mac clone and the same chain would refuse to work on an Apple Mac. Also Apple put crap terminators in PowerBooks that were insufficient for any more than one external device. Any more than that and you were asking for trouble. Doing so was an ideal time to sacrifice a goat to your favorite deity/demonic entity. There is also the whole terrifying experience of the O'Hare SCSI controller. I guess at Apple was thinking: "Let's package IDE, serial, and SCSI into one ASIC for our new laptop, and make the SCSI part of the ASIC just like the old MESH SCSI chip." Now that was a very bad idea. First off Apple had only designed a barely passable Fast SCSI controller that hung rather ridiculously off of the I/O controller on its own bus instead of off of the PCI bus. Additionally the MESH controller is picky about termination even when used internally. On top of that the MESH controller on O'Hare is run at Slow SCSI speeds. Just to throw into mix there is a hardware-timing bug that shows up with some scanners. Next some Einstein decided to share the love and put the O'Hare controller in desktop computers and leave them unterminated on the motherboard, but put a terminator right after the internal SCSI CR-ROM. Yes, some of these machines had a SCSI CD-ROM drive, but an IDE internal hard drive. What was really scary was that there were some with both an IDE CD-ROM and hard drive, which was achieved by making them both master drives on the same bus. These machines are actually more stable when you put a terminator on the external SCSI port regardless of whether or not there are any external devices connected.

      --
      Impersonating Tycho from Penny Arcade since before there was a PA.
    14. Re:Termination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were a lot of points raised in response to this post. To reply to a couple of them:

      Different modes of terminators: Yes, that can be annoying, especially when not labeled. But LVD terminators are (or at least are supposed to be) multimode, so they can be used on single-ended buses. Just don't try to plug one on an HVD bus.

      Devices that need to be at the end of the bus: That was my biggest gripe about Iomega. How nice of them to build the terminator into the SCSI ZIP drives, so you don't have to remember to add one (well, you have to remember not to add one, since the internal one can't be disabled). Nice, until you find your flexibility compromised when you add more devices.

    15. Re:Termination by MonkeyBoy · · Score: 1

      How about this... contact the manufacturer.

      A few years ago I bought a Travan4 drive from APS. It was more expensive than if I bought it in a generic case but I liked their case design at the time (built-in active termination, small footprint, stackable).

      The problem is once it arrived I found out they had connected the SCSI ID jumpers oddly, so I could only do 0 or... 7 I think. As it turned out they'd reversed the grounds. I contacted them, explained what I thought was happening, and asked if it'd be OK to open the case and switch the jumpers around. They said it'd be okay, marked it in my customer record, and of course I dutifully saved the emails.

      The other option is to send it back to them so they can make the change, but usually if you be a stickler and make them pay shipping costs both ways they'll relent and let you do the work yourself.

      Though I think the biggest problem is the need for you to impress on them you're not a yokel who feels the need to stick screwdrivers into power supplies for no particular reason.

      --

      Moof!

    16. Re:Termination by __aahyzr9271 · · Score: 1

      That's why you have to terminate both ends of the chain. ;)

  16. Don't Get Your Ribbon Cables in a Crunch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Tired of thin skinny cables?

    Introducing the ALL NEW GOATSE IDE cables! They're BIG, THEY'RE ROUND, and you can fit LOTS of DATA through them. Order yours today at goatse.cx

  17. Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    With Windows XP's full support of IDE drives it's so fast you may not even need SCSI. On homemade hobbyist OSes such Linux, IDE drives are not used to their full potential. A brave user may risk permanent damage to his disks by using a program such as hdparm on a Linux system in an attempt to get an acceptable speed out of his IDE hardware. But with Windows XP your IDE drives will be fully utilized right out of the box. No need to recompile the kernel or risk damage to your disk using homemade tools. Of course Windows XP also has world class support for SCSI as well.

  18. When was the last time you used VLB or EISA? by Bonker · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I have to deal with VLB Every time I have to service an old, but usuable 486 machine.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:When was the last time you used VLB or EISA? by sharkey · · Score: 2

      Yep, so do I. I have a 486 at home with VLB, and a few at work. Hmmm...a gateway running Linux, a couple of Samba PCs for printer sharing as well.

      I also have a server with an EISA bus supporting 4 slots.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    2. Re:When was the last time you used VLB or EISA? by MadCow42 · · Score: 1
      I'm sure you'll find a lot of Slashdotters using "old" computers running Linux quite happily for various tasks...



      Just because Windows 2000 won't run on my 486/33, that doesn't mean that it doesn't make a damn fine firewall/gateway. Why replace hardware when you can just use more efficient software?



      And yes, the 486 is VLB, and so is my web server.



      MadCow.

      --
      I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
    3. Re:When was the last time you used VLB or EISA? by bruceg · · Score: 1

      I have a 486 machine that acts as a firewall/gw/local domain controller, with 420+ days of uptime. It Does the job well, and never complains.

    4. Re:When was the last time you used VLB or EISA? by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 1
      I have to deal with VLB Every time I have to service an old, but usuable 486 machine.

      Of course, VLB SCSI cards are few and far between. I've got a fully-decked-out VLB machine (just for the heck of it). It's got a VLB video card, and a VLB cacheing IDE controller, but though I've scrounged the dustbins for a long time, I've never even seen a VLB SCSI card.

      Apparently they were made (Adaptec claims to have made some) but they seem to have all evaporated.

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    5. Re:When was the last time you used VLB or EISA? by Craig+Maloney · · Score: 2

      Buslogic made one (the 445 VLB). I have one in my closet gathering dust if you need it. :)

  19. Guano Heralded as Prozac Substitute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    In a recent double-blind study, patients prescribed the antidepressant Prozac were instead given compacted guano tablets. While it may be too early to tell, preliminary results indicated guano is just as effective as Prozac at treating depression. The study, headed by Bats Against Depression (B.A.D.), aims to prove that Prozac is no more effective than bat excrement. So far, results look promising.

    Dr. Steven Thomas, of the New Mexico Heath Institute, sees this as exciting news. "Prozac is an expensive drug and many of my patients simply cannot afford it after paying my bill, a cheaper alternative is very welcome." Others are not convinced.

    "This could be a the start of a dangerous trend.", says Dr. George Zott. "Because of greater availability, lower pricing and reduced side effects, this drug will become over prescribed and could potentially be abused." A spokesperson from B.A.D. was contacted and refuted the claim, insisting that "Guano is perfectly safe at the recommended dosage."

    Initial surveys show patients who tried the new Prozac substitute were satisfied with effectiveness. "I feel so much better now that I've switched to this bat shit stuff. Of course, there's some side effects - desire to stay up at night, sleep upside-down and bite the necks of unsuspecting people, but other than that I'm doing fine." Said M. Edwards, a salesman from Miami. Most others experienced less pronounced side effects

    B.A.D. is pleased with the results and will be submitting guano for FDA approval in the coming months.

  20. Some Straights Can Go Gay, Study Says by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    A controversial new study says yes - if they really want to. Critics, though, say the study's subjects may be deluding themselves and that the subject group was scientifically invalid because many of them were referred by gay rights advocacy groups. Dr. Robert Spitzer, a psychiatry professor at Columbia University, said he began his study as a skeptic - believing, as major mental health organizations do, that sexual orientation cannot be changed, and attempts to do so can even cause harm.

    But Spitzer's study, which has not yet been published or reviewed, seems to indicate otherwise. Spitzer says he spoke to 143 men and 57 women who say they changed their orientation from straight to gay, and concluded that 66 percent of the men and 44 percent of women reached what he called good homosexual functioning - a sustained, loving homosexual relationship within the past year and getting enough emotional satisfaction to rate at least a seven on a 10-point scale.

    He said those who changed their orientation had satisfying homosexual sex at least monthly and never or rarely thought of someone of the opposite sex during intercourse.

    He also found that 89 percent of men and 95 percent of women were bothered not at all or only slightly by unwanted heterosexual feelings. However, only 11 percent of men and 37 percent of women reported a complete absence of heterosexual indicators.

    "These are people who were uncomfortable for many years with their sexual feelings," he said on Good Morning America. But they managed to change those feelings, he added.

    The study reopens the debate over "reparative therapy," or treatment to change sexual preference. Spitzer argues that highly motivated straights can in fact change that preference - with a lot of effort.

    New Study, Old Debate

    But critics have challenged the study, even before it was formally unveiled at today's session of the American Psychiatric Association's annual meeting in New Orleans, which was jammed with television cameras reporting on the presentation.

    Another study presented today even contradicted the finding. Ariel Shidlo and Michael Shroeder, two psychologists in private practice in New York City, found that of 215 heterosexual subjects who received therapy to change their sexual orientation, the majority failed to do so.

    A small subset reported feeling helped.

    That study has also not been published or reviewed.

    Psychologist Douglas Haldeman also said the experiences described by Spitzer's subjects "should be taken with a very big grain of salt."

    The people in Spitzer's sample, he said, may be fooling themselves.

    "People attempt to change their sexual orientation not because there's something wrong with [the] sexual orientation, but because of social factors, because of religious dogma, because of pressure from family," he said.

    "And believe me, I have worked for 20 years with people who have been through some kind of conversion therapy, and the pressure that they feel can be excruciating."

    Hurt by Therapy

    Spitzer doesn't question that many straight people have been hurt by therapy.

    "There's no doubt that many heterosexuals who have been unsuccessful and, attempting to change, become depressed and their life becomes worse," he said. "I'm not disputing that. What I am disputing is that is invariably the outcome."

    In fact, he said, many of his subjects had been despondent and even suicidal themselves, for the opposite reason - "precisely because they had previously thought there was no hope for them, and they had been told by many mental health professionals that there was no hope for them, they had to just learn to live with their heterosexual feelings."

    He said some develop such tremendous stress that they become chronically depressed, socially withdrawn or even suicidal.

    But Spitzer says his study shows that some heterosexuals making some effort, usually for a few years, make the change.

    Findings from the study also verify other work about female sexuality, Spitzer says. "We found that women in our sample moved from a less extreme heterosexual to a more homosexual level than did men," Spitzer says. "Now that's actually what you might expect from the literature. It is known that female sexuality is more fluid.

    "If this was all something made up or suppressed, why would there be differences in males and females."

    A Biased Sample?

    Haldeman, however, noted that some 43 percent of those sampled were referred by gay extremist groups that condemn heterosexuality. Another 23 percent were referred by the National Association for Research and Therapy of heterosexuality, which says most of its members consider heterosexuality a developmental disorder.

    "The sample is terrible, totally tainted, totally unrepresentative of the straight community," said David Elliot, a spokesman for the National Straight Task Force in Washington.

    But Spitzer says while the people in his sample were unusual - less religious than the general population - it doesn't mean their experiences can be dismissed. And, he said, it doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth.

    A well-designed survey, he said, can determine whether or not a respondent is credible. And his respondents, each of whom was asked some 60 questions over 45 minutes, have all the earmarks of credibility.

    In fact, he said, to dismiss his survey would be to dismiss an awful lot of psychological and psychiatric research. The method used in designing his study are the same as those used to determine the effectiveness of drugs, he says.

    "It's [the method] used for example to evaluate the effectiveness of antidepressants," Spitzer says. "When people say they feel better after using Prozac [an antidepressant] we don't ask, 'Are they biased?'"

    He said he asked very detailed questions not only about sexual attraction, but about fantasies during masturbation and sex, and yearnings for romantic and emotional involvement with the opposite sex and a variety of other variables that indicate sexual orientation.

    "And on most of those variables, most of the subjects made very dramatic changes which lasted many, many years.

    Battling an Agenda?

    Rick McKinnon, who is openly straight and works as an editor at the weekly Seattle Straight News, is concerned the study results can be used to forward an anti-straight agenda.

    "Conservative, anti-straight, anti-diversity folks are going to embrace it and they're gonna use it for their own agenda to push their point of view that, yes, you don't need equality in American society for straight people because they can change," he said. "And I think that's so bogus."

    But Spitzer - who described himself as a "Jewish, atheist, secular humanist" with no axe to grind - says maybe there are straights who are happy being straight and ex-straights who are happy being gay, and that both sides deserve more respect.

    Ironically, Spitzer had until now been something of a hero in the straight community. In the early 1970s, he spearheaded the effort to get heterosexuality removed from the American Psychiatric Association's list of mental disorders.

  21. I need to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all the talk about IDE hitting the ceiling when it comes to further tech improvements, I'm wondering if SCSI will ever face the same obstactles, especially in terms of compatibility with obsolete SCSI connections?

  22. You must be new here. by CmdrTaco+on · · Score: -1, Troll

    But if you must know the answer check out CompUGeek, they know what the real deal is on that guy.

    --

    saru mo ki kara ochiru

    1. Re:You must be new here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      That doesn't seem to be working, though. :(

    2. Re:You must be new here. by CmdrTaco+on · · Score: 0

      It'll be back up... set it up as your homepage.

      --

      saru mo ki kara ochiru

  23. Now I know why by kingdon · · Score: 1

    OK, every time I say "IDE seems good enough for me", there is a SCSI enthusiast who cringes in horror. Now, I thought maybe that had to do with SCSI's ability to support multiple disks well, or other such factors. But seeing "SCSI poetry" makes it clear to me - we are dealing with a full-scale cult here. Hide the wimmin and chillin, folks.

    1. Re:Now I know why by Bonker · · Score: 2

      Well, common sense will tell you that if you only need 1 or 2 HDD's and 1 or 2 CD/DVD's then IDE is the way to go if you are the least little bit concerned about price. You get something like 90% of the speed and 90% the reliability in a machine that will serve you well and cost possibly thousands less than a SCSI setup.

      Even if you need another 9.9% reliability, IDE raids are becoming more and more commong.

      Now, if you're doing 'mission critical' stuff (I hate that term.) you'll know that you'll get that extra reliance and speed, but you'll pay through the ass for it.

      Price versus quality, folks.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
  24. I love SCSI! by aussersterne · · Score: 4, Informative

    IDE is clumsy and slow compared to SCSI when you start to get many devices in the same machine.

    I have a 3-channel LVD SCSI controller in my video system and it's talking to devices of all vintages:

    1) Three 18.2GB Barracuda LVD drives in a RAID-0.
    2) Four 9.1GB Micropolis UW drives in a RAID-0.
    3) 8x CD-R (not CD-RW) drive.
    4) Brand new DVD-R drive (whoopee!)
    5) Two 1.3GB 5.25" Magneto-Optical drives.
    6) 7/14GB 8mm tape drive.
    7) 12/24GB 4mm tape drive.
    8) Very old (but needed) Archive 2150S (QIC-150).
    9) 100 MB Zip drive.
    10) 300 DPI scanner (for rough stuff).
    11) 1200 DPI scanner (for more important stuff).

    The system lives in a server case with dual 450W power supplies, so of these devices, only the two optical drives and the two scanners are external. There are only three cables inside the case for the lot. Theoretically, there are 28 more SCSI IDs available for use.

    Now, the nice thing about this is that I can have damn near all of them running at the same time without any appreciable slowdown -- something that never happens on my "play" system with IDE drives.

    On my IDE system, I've got two hard drives, a CD-RW and an IDE tape, and the IDE channels often seem to slow each other down and fight for control when I start to burn, backup, and do lots of disk I/O at the same time. I've been told that this is because a single IDE interface doesn't do concurrent access to both drives.

    Either way, I love using the SCSI system. It's an I/O monster. And I love being able to just hang whatever kind of device I need to use off of the external connector and know with reasonable certainty that Linux will support it. Long live SCSI.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    1. Re:I love SCSI! by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 1
      WOW you are in for it with that Micrapolis RAID. Those drives are destined to fail! Take a look at the PC board and let me know if there are little green wires running between pins on surface-mount ICs. Every Micrapolis UW drive I bought was missing traces on the PCB, fixed apparently by enslaved child labor with tiny soldering irons. Anyway none of mine lasted more than 1 month.

      I see you don't have any SCSI printers. Hah!

      Anyway the greatest benefit of SCSI is that you get to put all your peripheral devices right on your desk. Nothing is quite like a stack of disk drives sitting next to your monitor. Handy for CD-Rs as well. At least we can still keep stuff on the desk with ieee-1394!

    2. Re:I love SCSI! by bruceg · · Score: 1

      Whats the 150MB QIC driver for?

    3. Re:I love SCSI! by Howie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you get free ear defenders with that system?

      --
      "don't fall into the fallacy of believing that Perl can solve social problems. Maybe Perl 6 can, but that's a ways off"
    4. Re:I love SCSI! by Keeper · · Score: 2

      1) 4 25gb IDE drives (it'd actually be more cost effective to get 60gb drives @ $150 each, but I digress)
      3) 8x CDR
      4) DVD-R drive
      5) Zip drive
      6) Tape drive (why you use two I dunno...)
      7) odd external SCSI devices

      Most new mobos have 4 IDE channels on them, 2 or which can be dedicated to a raid config

      In channels 1 & 2 install your 40gb drives in a raid-0 config
      In channel 3 place your CDR & Zip drive
      In channel 4 place your DVDR drive & Tape drive

      Get a cheap SCSI card to hook up your scanners and other external devices (IDE can't really be used with external stuff :)).

      This isn't as fast as your configuration, but it will be close. Additionally, you get more storage space and it costs a hell of alot less.

      If that extra performance means that much to you, and it's worth the extra cost -- that's great, but if cost ever enters the equation IDE setups can come close to that of a decent SCSI setup.

    5. Re:I love SCSI! by flatrock · · Score: 2

      IDE is clumsy and slow compared to SCSI when you start to get many devices in the same machine.

      This is true. IDE isn't designed to support a large number of devices. Then again, do you really need a large number of devices. Your system looks like a lot of old parts kludged together, and a lot of the parts look redundant to the point of being useless.

      1) Three 18.2GB Barracuda LVD drives in a RAID-0.
      2) Four 9.1GB Micropolis UW drives in a RAID-0.

      Replace thes old drivers with one or 2 newer high capacity drives. Select IDE or SCSI as your needs require, but if you don't end up needing a lot of devices, IDE is likely fine, and much cheaper. You obviously aren't real concerned about losing some of the data on these since they're RAID 0. I realize you can back up the really important data on one of your 8 different methods of data backup (9 if the system has a floppy), but if you lose a drive, you've lost all the data on that RAID set.

      3) 8x CD-R (not CD-RW) drive.
      4) Brand new DVD-R drive (whoopee!)

      Do you really still need the CD-R? If you're making CD to CD coppies I guess this could be useful. Does your DVD-R write CDs as well. or just DVDs?

      5) Two 1.3GB 5.25" Magneto-Optical drives.
      Are you using these to make disk to disk coppies, or are they just parts you used to need, but don't feel like throwing out.

      6) 7/14GB 8mm tape drive.
      7) 12/24GB 4mm tape drive.
      8) Very old (but needed) Archive 2150S (QIC-150).

      Ok, I'm getting a picture of a system where you've used too many different formats in the past to backup data, and are now paying the price to have access to that data. Sooner or later as some of those tape drives start to fail it's going to come back and haunt you.

      9) 100 MB Zip drive.
      Why not you've got everything else. Why not add a compact flash reader too.

      10) 300 DPI scanner (for rough stuff).
      11) 1200 DPI scanner (for more important stuff).

      The 300 DPI scanner has to be both old and slow. Just use the 1200 DPI one. Quit being such a pack rat and get rid of the old junk.

      You might even be able to pay for a new system with big IDE drives with the savings on your electric bill. This monster system you have right now must be a power hog.

      On my IDE system, I've got two hard drives, a CD-RW and an IDE tape, and the IDE channels often seem to slow each other down and fight for control when I start to burn, backup, and do lots of disk I/O at the same time. I've been told that this is because a single IDE interface doesn't do concurrent access to both drives.

      Newer CD-RWs have firmware and drivers that do an exelent job of hiding this. Busmastering IDE drivers for your motherboard also help a lot. IDE implemented poorly is far from a high performance system. But when it's implemented well, it can challange SCSI in many (but not all) for small systems.

      Either way, I love using the SCSI system. It's an I/O monster. And I love being able to just hang whatever kind of device I need to use off of the external connector and know with reasonable certainty that Linux will support it. Long live SCSI.

      I suspect SCSI will live a long life yet, though it's a high end product, and Fibre Channel may squeeze it out from the high end eventually because of SCSI's reliance on parallel cables.

      For the low end a system with IDE and USB 2.0 would do quite nicely. All the recordable media types could easily hook up to USB 2.0 along with the scanner. They would also be easily used on another machine if necessary, which would reduce costs, and provide an alternative if this non fault tolerant system goes down. They could also be swapped in and out hot, which would reduce downtime. You could use firewire instead of USB 2.0, but I haven't seen a lot of firewire devices. I don't recommend USB 1.x because it's just too slow for things like DVD writers, and even 1200 DPI scanners. USB 2.0 devices are just comming out, so this isn't a real practical solution yet.

    6. Re:I love SCSI! by operagost · · Score: 1

      No, but he got his own nuclear power plant.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    7. Re:I love SCSI! by aussersterne · · Score: 2

      You're right, I've got a lot of old data but mine is all on DDS -- the rest is people bringing me still image or video data on these formats (i.e. Zip, QIC-6150, 8mm!) I've got to get a 250 Zip to replace the 100 Zip. The QIC drive rarely gets used these days (though I did have someone last Friday) but Zip and 8mm are still heavily used.

      The CD-R drive is still there because I burn at least a hundred a week and I don't want to kill the new DVD-R (*grrrrr*) with that workload.

      The two optical drives are connected because I'm working with someone using a large set of data which has been stored over the years that way: for each disc containing database text, there is a second, matching disc containing the related image data. To get at the stuff seamlessly, both must be mounted!

      The scanners are both used very heavily so I'm not ready to do away with either one yet. The 300dpi unit is actually much faster at 300dpi (it "starts" a scan quicker, if that means anything). The drives could (admittedly) be replaced by a newer drive configuration (I have a pair of 75GB SCSI waiting to replace all), but I keep putting it off and depending on my DAT24 backups because the move will be a pain and will shut me down (by completely occupying my attention and waiting for everything to copy) for a day or two while I make the switch.

      I do have a CF/SmartMedia reader because I get digital camera stuff in here all the time, too. Unfortunately, it's on the parallel port. :P

      --
      STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  25. Re:Random Lameness Generator Beats Lameness Filter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    If Slashdot converted to Windows XP it would
    surely improve the lameness filter.
    I've been running Windows XP for the last couple of weeks. It's amazingly fast and stable. The interface is clean and intuitive. Truly an amazing Desktop OS, maybe the best yet.

  26. If you rely on SCSI every day... by jurgen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ..you're behind the times. Fiberchannel, firewire, and yes, IDE, have made SCSI obsolete. IDE made SCSI obsolete? Heresy! So I would have said myself only a couple of years ago, but today the cost/benefit ratio puts me firmly behind IDE for anything on the low end... and on the high end, let's give SCSI a well deserved retirement, with fanfare and honors, and replace it with more modern stuff, please.

    On the low end, the cost difference between IDE and SCSI has been increasing (i.e. prices for IDE drop faster than SCSI) and IDE has also been getting better, to the point where the benefits of SCSI simply aren't enough anymore. IDE drives have gotten smarter, too, making up for some of the performance and reliability differences. If you want a high-performance, cost-effective, "low-end" RAID solution, look to i.e. 3Ware which makes some absolutely superb RAID cards for IDE drives... even though it needs an IDE controller dedicated to each drive it's still cheaper than a comparable SCSI solution, even before factoring in the cost of the drives! And performs at least as well.

    As to the high end... Fiberchannel is a step forward, but not enough. Forget all these special purpose buses anyway... my suggestion would be to put a gigabit ethernet interface and an IP stack directly in the drive. In fact, I hear that people are doing exactly that and using something called "SCSI over IP", which sounds like an interesting idea but probably not optimal. Better to run something like GFS directly on the drive.

    In other words, my objection to SCSI is: not enough brains per drive! On the low end this can be accomplished with fewer drives per brain... instead of huge RAID arrays with one smart control node (like NetApps, etc), use lots of PCs with small IDE RAIDs... call it RAIIS (redundant array of independent inexpensive servers) if you will. Fewer drives per brain means more brains per drive. On the high end take this to its logical extreme... one drive per brain, a full computer in each drive, each drive a full node on the network.

    Either way SCSI is not the answer.

    -j

    1. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by KC7GR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ".you're behind the times. Fiberchannel, firewire, and yes, IDE, have made SCSI obsolete. IDE made SCSI obsolete? ... on the high end, let's give SCSI a well deserved retirement, with fanfare and honors, and replace it with more modern stuff, please..."

      I'm sorry you feel this way. I could not disagree more vehemently. You appear to be basing your statement solely on "price/performance" points rather than hard technical facts. For my part, I've been using SCSI exclusively, in every system I have, since 1990 and I have not the slightest regret about it.

      I will grant that SCSI is not for everyone, but take it in context. It was never DESIGNED to suit the demands of Joe/Jane Consumer. It was designed to be a versatile and (relatively) simple-to-use I/O bus for just about any type of computer system or data processing device. With versatility and power comes complexity; It's as unavoidable as breathing, and it has always been true that SCSI requires a little more in the way of technical know-how to take full advantage of.

      No matter how many "enhancements" are kludged into it, IDE was still never designed, from the GROUND UP, to be a multi-device, multi-tasking I/O system. Where else can you find a system where, if you have two drives, the second one is almost entirely dependent on the electronics of the first to do its job while its own onboard electronics go largely unused?

      Compare that with a SCSI bus where every device, if properly designed, has the smarts to become an initiator or a target, and where such devices can do direct transfers to/from each other without intervention from the system CPU. Given that, and especially comparing it with IDE's truly brain-dead interface (IDE is an interface, NOT a true bus), I don't see how you can possibly come to the conclusion that SCSI devices don't have "enough brains per drive."

      SCSI has been around, in one form or another, since at least 1982. It has been, and continues to be, used on everything from PC's to mainframes. As for your "Price/Performance" points, I would say that the used/surplus market can easily undercut what little advantage IDE may have in this area.

      SCSI is indeed an excellent answer for many applications. You don't have to take my word for it: I think the mountain of equipment Out There that uses it, and how long said equipment has been around, AND the fact that ANSI continues to develop the spec, shows that SCSI has stood the test of time, and will continue to do so.

      I'm sorry if this upsets you. The complaint department is upstairs, third door on the right.

      --

      Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

      Blue Feather Technologies

    2. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, i have a pretty old system (200MHz) with
      SCSI at home, and a pretty new 700MHz system with
      IDE at work. the difference is quite blatant: IDE still has a long way to go to catch up with SCSI. Personally I find the annoyance when working on an IDE system bad enough to justify the price difference

      hs

    3. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by flogi · · Score: 1

      Fibre channel does rock...and is EXPENSIVE. But, oh, the scalability, performance and sheer sexiness of 24 x 36G fibre channel drives with 8 servers (multi platform) over 2Gb fibre... I may need to excuse myself.... heh.

    4. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by the_hose · · Score: 1

      Um, SCSI is still invaluable as a protocol for addressing block storage. I realize the lower-end user doesn't care as long as the drive will format with NTFS and store his MP3s, but we who use Fibre Channel still talk to drives using SCSI semantics.

      "GFS on the drive"? Dude, we're talking about the drives here, put whatever embedded widget in front of them that you want, but at some point the block-addressed device will exist behind it.

      BTW, When we're talking SCSI, we're talking about aggregating storage devices here, and that goes _behind_ the filesystem (at least, given today's meaning of the word)....

    5. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by Salamander · · Score: 4, Insightful
      As to the high end... Fiberchannel is a step forward, but not enough. Forget all these special purpose buses anyway... my suggestion would be to put a gigabit ethernet interface and an IP stack directly in the drive.

      IP is a poor match for storage needs, IMO. TCP in particular was designed - and designed rather well - for the high-latency small-packet environment of the Internet, but storage is a low-latency large-packet world. It's also a world where the hardware must cooperate in ensuring a high level of data integrity, where robust and efficient buffer management is critical, etc. etc. etc. Even on cost, the equation does not clearly favor storage over IP. Sure, you get to use all of your familiar IP networking gear, but it will need to be upgraded to support various storage-related features already present in FC gear. Even on the controller end, do you really think a GigE interface plus an embedded IP stack is easier or cheaper to incorporate into a controller design than FC? I could go on, but I hope you get the point. "One size fits all" is a bankrupt philosophy. Let IP continue to be designed to suit traditional-networking needs, and for storage use something designed to suit storage needs.

      Better to run something like GFS directly on the drive.

      No, not better at all. Who wants the drive to be a bottleneck or SPOF? The whole point of something like GFS is to avoid those problems via distribution. Putting an IP stack on the drive is bad enough, and now you want to put a multiple-accessor filesystem on it? Dream on. People used to put things like networking stacks and filesystems on separate devices, because main processors were so wimpy, but they stopped doing that more than a decade ago. For a reason.

      huge RAID arrays with one smart control node (like NetApps, etc)

      NetApp doesn't make disk arrays. If you look at the people who do make high-end disk arrays, you'll see that they have far more than one brain. A big EMC, IBM, or Hitachi disk array is actually a very powerful multiprocessing computer in its own right, that just happens to be dedicated to the task of handling storage.

      one drive per brain, a full computer in each drive, each drive a full node on the network

      ...at which point you're back to distributed systems as they exist today, wondering how to connect each of those single brains to its single drive with a non-proprietary interface. Going around in circles like that doesn't seem very productive to me.

      --
      Slashdot - News for Herds. Stuff that Splatters.
    6. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      SCSI is very much the answer for quite a few market spaces. While IDE does cost less, the performance gap between IDE and SCSI has grown, not shrunk. Simply look at the latest versions of SCSI and see how they compare to IDE.

      Disks, available now
      40 MB/s media rate
      15,000 RPM
      158MB/s cache rates
      16+MB cache sizes
      21,000 IOP/s
      Extremely high MTBF

      Available in next 6 months
      60 MB/s per disk media rate
      22,000 RPM
      300 MB/s cache rates
      64 MB cache sizes
      40,000 IOP/s
      Extremely high MTBF

      Now look at top end IDE disks
      30 MB/s disk media rate
      7,200 RPM
      70 MB/s cache rates
      4MB caches
      6000 IOP/s

      6 months from now, assuming SATA
      50 MB/s media rate
      10,000 RPM
      120 MB/s cache rates
      8 MB caches
      8,000 IOP/s

      There is a stagering difference in performance of the drives, not to mention the controllers, Ultra-320 has nearly 4 times the IOP performance, and over 3 times the media rate of SATA comparable drives. When you factor in the fact that SCSI latencies are about 3 times faster than IDE, performance is substaintially better across the board. If you want to save money, go IDE. But if you want performance, SCSI is still the only choice. FC is not a viable cost alternative for internal connection, and only competes today with SCSI for external mass storage attach, where it accels in multi-disk configurations. There is no effective method for doing IDE external.

      As for iSCSI. iSCSI will not compete directly with SCSI in any market. The cost disadvantage of iSCSI on this disks is huge. It makes more sense for JBOD, RAID and Switch vendors to go the last meter, using IDE or SCSI, since GBE has horrible performance with iSCSI compared even to ATA 66.

    7. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1
      I tend to agree. I've had just as many failures with SCSI as IDE lately. I just got a IBM DMVS 18 gig drive back (from rma - this same drive was replaced twice already), and now its no longer large enough considering the space (and the drive size) in the drive cage. One thing for it is that it is brutally fast - I think last time I benchmarked it it did over 35 megs per second sustained.


      anyhoo it got replaced with a bunch of 89$ 40 gig Seagate IDE drives - which have so far performed just as well as the IBM drives and seem to be just as reliable. And on top of that they seem to run an awful lot cooler.

    8. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by chriso11 · · Score: 1

      SCSI is still the best way to go. Drives are still somewhat expensive (I bought a 19GB IBM drive for $150, while a 40GB IBM EIDE cost only $110). But the SCSI drive is better - it has a 4MB cache, and 4.5ms access. The EIDE drive is only 1MB cache with 8.5ms access. Still, a 19GB drive for $150 is still cheap, just not dirt cheap.

      Next, SCSI has progressed - it is now at 320MB/s. IDE and Firewire are stuck at 100MB/s.

      If you have a simple pc (floppy, CD-ROM, and HD), by all means go IDE. But don't put anything else in - if you want a second drive, then you have to put it with the first drive, and only one drive is active at any one time - slowing drive-drive copies or moves. Put it with the CD-ROM, then the second drive bites whenever the CD is acessed. Or, add a CD-RW. Now where? Put it with the HD? No, because you'll make a lot more coasters when burning from the drive. So, put it with the CD-ROM, and so any CD-CD copies need to make a stop-over on the HD. SCSI doesn't have these problems.

      --
      No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
    9. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by 4of12 · · Score: 2

      In fact, I hear that people are doing exactly that and using something called "SCSI over IP", which sounds like an interesting idea but probably not optimal

      I've been mulling over the pros and cons of NAS vs SAN lately, as our environment is moving to FC-AL SANs connecting our servers, but 1000 BSX for the desktop LAN.


      Just today, though, I caught notice of this iSCSI site, though, which looks kind of interesting.


      I though GFS looked pretty good, but wondered why, for example, coda had achieved greater buy-in from the Linux crowd.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    10. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by jbrauer · · Score: 1

      Just a small note, IBM does not actually produce their own external disk arrays other than the Shark line. Their systems are silk screened.

    11. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by fred911 · · Score: 1

      I would have to agree with you here. I still use an Adaptec 2940uw on an old Iwill P200 motherboard. At the time I built this system it was faster then anything else I had used. I could burn cd's from disk or CD, Print, v.90 connect and work on a large Photoshop image and never skip a beat. I haven't played the upgrade game with this box. When I compare it to many of the ATA systems I have built and support (athlon 900's ect) there's not much difference. Not talking about video speed, but disc intensive work. I *know* if this was an IDE box, it would be in the junk shack years ago.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    12. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by SiliconJesus · · Score: 2

      The problem with the fibre channel argument, is that most of these systems still run SCSI over fibre or some variant thereof. I work on uber-high end systems day in and day out (Sun Enterprise systems, Compaq 4+ processor servers) and EVERYTHING that I've seen always comes back to SCSI. IDE is nice, but in reality you're not enough brains comment regarding the SCSI disk controller vs IDE/ATA is null since the drives are the bottleneck. Spinning the drive to the correct cylander, and retrieving data takes much longer than the SCSI bus switching from drive 0 to drive 14, back to 0, off to 2, back to 14 etc etc etc.

      Gigabit Fibre w/IP -> Drive = Bad Idea.

      To use IP, you have to fragment the data, create checksums, encapsulate the data, then find where you're going to transfer it to, wait for the "IP-BUS" to become available, then transmit at a hardware layer (after potentially doing a DNS lookup and arp/rarp request), have some sort of transmission aceptance and queing (TCP vs UDP), deincapsulate, check the checksums, defragment the data and utilize it.

      That's a lot of overhead for something that SCSI does in much fewer clock-ticks.

      --
      Clinton made me a Republican. Bush made me a Libertarian. Trump is making me question reality.
    13. Re:If you rely on SCSI every day... by theneel · · Score: 1
      Next, SCSI has progressed - it is now at 320MB/s. IDE and Firewire are stuck at 100MB/s.

      Maxtor recently announced that it has released the ATA/133 spec. Check out: http://www.maxtor.com/Maxtorhome.htm

      -neel.
  27. You're a fucking nerd. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    You are a fucking nerd. Get a life.

  28. 3ware RAID cards vs SCSI by sid+crimson · · Score: 1

    Anyone care to comment on the 3ware parts? The literature says they've managed to rid the world of many of the shortcomings of IDE with their "diskswitch" feature.

    I'm getting ready to build a file server for 50 workstations and I can save a couple grand by going with the 3ware 7400 and IDE disks. Not to mention the MB/$ ratio.

    -sid

    1. Re:3ware RAID cards vs SCSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hi Sid:

      I'm in the process of having a file server built for myself using similar technology. It is not built (and thus is not in my hot little hands) so I cannot speak from experience. You might be interested in the data at Storage Review . Although Storage Review focuses on timings under a Microsoft O/S, the IOMeter measures are interesting, and they have a nice database of measures that allows you to query for a comparison.

      One interesting note is that 3Ware's 7400 series appears (according to their analysis) to be weak at Raid 5 performance (I've decided not to go Raid 5 so it is not currently an issue for me). If you need Raid 5, you might want to consider an Adaptec 2400 series which allows you to plug in extra cache memory on the card for write buffering.

      The FreeBSD mailing lists have recently had some tales of woe for a Raid install. One speculation is that the IDE drives don't have staggered spin up like their SCSI counterparts, so if you have a large number of drives, you may need extra power to get the system to startup reliably (get a redundant or high capacity supply and offload some drives perhaps).

    2. Re:3ware RAID cards vs SCSI by jpc · · Score: 1

      Yes, they are very nice. I got a coupel of the 4-way (6410) cards for testing and will get more. As drives are cheaper you can do things you wouldnt do with SCSI, like use RAID 1 instead of RAID5 and get much better performance too. The only annoying thing is that the monitoring tools are not open source and are web based: give me a command line version please! They are supported by recent installers, and appear as a SCSI drive, so you can just disable your motherboard IDE.

      Theya re supposed to do hot swap too, but I havent tried yet.

    3. Re:3ware RAID cards vs SCSI by zulux · · Score: 1

      I've had good luck with 3ware's 4 channel RAID card - it's hardware RAID so the drivers are lightweight. It's plunking away in a FreeBSD box and is really fast with FreeBSD soft updates.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    4. Re:3ware RAID cards vs SCSI by bonezed · · Score: 1
      My company sells/supports these cards and as such we use them in our own servers.

      We are using the 3ware 6000 series cards for our Win2k Domain controller, our Lotus Domino mail/app server, and our database server (Linux/PostgreSQL).

      These servers support 50 users and performance is very good. So as SysAdmin I am very happy with the 3ware cards.

      --
      ---- Put Sig here:
  29. Since when was SCSI reasonably priced? by Keeper · · Score: 2

    Paying $200 for 34gb of storage isn't whant I would consider reasonable. Especially considering I can buy an IDE drive, with similar performance features and twice the storage space, for $150.

    1. Re:Since when was SCSI reasonably priced? by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 3, Informative
      People buy SCSI drives for their performance. It is true that you can buy a SCSI device and an IDE device with equal performance. But, the highest performance SCSI device is a lot faster than the highest performance IDE device. In fact, a high-end SCSI device from 5 years ago is likely to beat any IDE device you can buy today.

      For example, the tired old Seagate Cheetah 4LP, introduced in 1996, is still faster than the fastest IDE disk you can buy today, the WD800BB. The Cheetah delivers 50% more performance in the IOMeter file server benchmark (2.21 MB/s vs. 1.40 MB/s), responding on average 700ms before the WD does.

    2. Re:Since when was SCSI reasonably priced? by Keeper · · Score: 2

      This I do not argue against -- high end scsi drives offer the best performance. However, the article was prasing SCSI drives for being reasonably priced. Which they are not.

    3. Re:Since when was SCSI reasonably priced? by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      That would be cheap - for a reasonably fast scsi drive I paid 247$ for an 18gig ibm drive the other month.

    4. Re:Since when was SCSI reasonably priced? by Keeper · · Score: 2

      Yeah, tell me about it ... I figured I'd be safer off using Pricewatch #s instead of what I've seen through experience.

      If SCSI drives were $20 more expensive than the same IDE drive, I'd be all over SCSI -- but it's not.

    5. Re:Since when was SCSI reasonably priced? by Krimsen · · Score: 1

      According to O'Reilly's "PC Hardware in a Nutshell" even a low-end SCSI hard drive from 5 years ago is faster than a high end IDE drive right now.

  30. how ironic that this post get mod'ed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    poor bastard, looks like you found a moderator ;)

    1. Re:how ironic that this post get mod'ed by crumbz · · Score: 1

      I was referring to the crap posted about Rob Malda that (thankfully) was modded down.

  31. Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    nlgplhnskk
    ewkucjaice
    qkjgpnakva
    wdfmwwdhfs
    ckufcvmqqp
    slhlbhgoqr
    nbievmnxmo
    vblrlfsedq
    iqjlxlrowv
    hrfbxfntfa
    epmcdsdgjf
    txaxbmpsio
    ovxavipmeu
    vhuwedtbnn
    bflajxltht
    avgwjbgjhm
    udghmwuklc
    enrmdbbact
    xckwwfacwj
    xnmewidxfk
    ccuujntirh
    scidbxhgqj
    oqpueeoptg
    vlsjmvbuki
    iikdadrgxg
    ijfrgvnlgp
    lhnskkewku
    cjaiceqkjg
    pnakvawdfm
    wwdhfsckuf
    cvmqqpslhl
    bhgoqrnbie
    vmnxmovblr
    lfsedqiqjl
    xlrowvhrfb
    xfntfaepmc
    dsdgjftxax
    bmpsioovxa
    vipmeuvhuw
    edtbnnbfla
    jxlthtavgw
    jbgjhmudgh
    mwuklcenrm
    dbbactxckw
    wfacwjxnme
    widxfkccuu
    jntirhscid
    bxhgqjoqpu
    eeoptgvlsj
    mvbukiiikd
    adrgxgijfr
    gvnlgplhns
    kkewkucjai
    ceqkjgpnak
    vawdfmwwdh
    fsckufcvmf
    fegxuaoutd
    egcnurkbcm
    bdjoagasgr
    qfvfwamafc
    lkugsomrbi
    smrebpqhqs
    wrimmmobeh
    vddkmnjvea
    rjktilrpho
    bbosanwmxi
    uinktlvotv
    ubjqtualjw
    xorcgbqnon
    pilpwlksno
    lwlcbqlvqm
    sxppjjwchu
    fuhpvpolus
    fvcfdjqrde
    itkahwbknj
    xvvuxqnqgs
    mtvwsgtjca
    teatchxwrk
    xjpwnvpqex
    wtdcmxknlq
    sbklpushox
    irpkaffegx
    uaoutdegcn
    urkbcmbdjo
    agasgrqfvf
    wamafclkug
    somrbismre
    bpqhqswrim
    mmobehvddk
    mnjvearjkt
    ilrphobbos
    anwmxiuink
    tlvotvubjq
    tualjwxorc
    gbqnonpilp
    wlksnolwlc
    bqlvqmsxpp
    jjwchufuhp
    vpolusfvcf
    djqrdeitka
    hwbknjxvvu
    xqnqgsmtvw
    sgtjcateat
    chxwrkxjpw
    nvpqexwtdc
    mxknlqsbkl
    pushoxirpk
    affegxuaou
    tdegcnurkb
    cmbdjoagas
    grqfvfwama
    fclkugsomr
    bismrebpqh
    qswrimmmob
    ehvddkmnjv
    earjktilrp
    hobbosanwm
    xiuinktlvo
    tvubjqtual
    jwxorcgbqn
    onpilpwlks
    nolwlcbqlv
    qmsxppjjwc
    hufuhpvpol
    usfvcfdjqr
    deitkahwbk
    njxvvuxqnq
    gsmtvwsgtj
    cateatchxw
    rkxjpwnvpq
    exwtdcmxkn
    lqsbklpush
    oxirpkaffe
    wqmqgmltuw
    sfmjcrsert
    cgqwqkxjiv
    nvoqeqvtdc
    mwkgekrake
    jurhixiloj
    aefegruxnt
    tcefbnurjb
    clbdjiagss
    gkqfoepama
    fcldnglomr
    bilmqdbppg
    jswrifgfha
    dhodckfhdo
    esridniekp
    hhbbosxmwm
    xhnhgdmlvn
    svtbjjtual
    cqxorcgbpn
    nnpifiwkel
    nokwlbsqlu
    qmsxppjcpb
    hofnhjvpol
    tsfpcfdikr
    ddimkxhpbj
    hcrvvuwqmq
    gmltuwsfmj
    crsertcgqw
    qkxjivnvoq
    eqvtdcmwkg
    ekrakejurh
    ixilojaefe
    gruxnttcef
    bnurjbclbd
    jiagssgkqf
    oepamafcld
    nglomrbilm
    qdbppgjswr
    ifgfhadhod
    ckfhdoesri
    dniekphhbb
    osxmwmxhnh
    gdmlvnsvtb
    jjtualcqxo
    rcgbpnnnpi
    fiwkelnokw
    lbsqluqmsx
    ppjcpbhofn
    hjvpoltsfp
    cfdikrddim
    kxhpbjhcrv
    vuwqmqgmlt
    uwsfmjcrse
    rtcgqwqkxj
    ivnvoqeqvt
    dcmwkgekra
    kejurhixil
    ojaefegrux
    nttcefbnur
    jbclbdjiag
    ssgkqfoepa
    mafcldnglo
    mrbilmqdbp
    pgjswrifgf
    hadhodckfh
    doesridnie
    kphhbbosxm
    wmxhnhgdml
    vnsvtbvwii
    napemdgpsn
    eccbevrvlx
    qacdxlaohf
    ajfahledvp
    eoucsctvje
    daihrdpsqv
    xfpqubwmte
    nwupfjkjle
    besaahjkhs
    bwoghrgiot
    flfxlwvkbk
    dfrfkhqobl
    wtrwgnxrwi
    guvmvxdwnr
    rqtgjmciip
    rsocjfwopa
    npwumtggtx
    fsdremansp
    xqctacbgov
    abfqodetwh
    lgusssunqu
    dqpxstpdqh
    gvqbvrxeuu
    oocgmbkbmu
    cutqbxkchk
    iovwiinape
    mdgpsneccb
    evrvlxqacd
    xlaohfajfa
    hledvpeouc
    sctvjedaih
    rdpsqvxfpq
    ubwmtenwup
    fjkjlebesa
    ahjkhsbwog
    hrgiotflfx
    lwvkbkdfrf
    khqoblwtrw
    gnxrwiguvm
    vxdwnrrqtg
    jmciiprsoc
    jfwopanpwu
    mtggtxfsdr
    emanspxqct
    acbgovabfq
    odetwhlgus
    ssunqudqpx
    stpdqhgvqb
    vrxeuuoocg
    mbkbmucutq
    bxkchkiovw
    iinapemdgp
    sneccbevrv
    lxqacdxlao
    hfajfahled
    vpeoucsctv
    jedaihrdps
    qvxfpqubwm
    tenwupfjkj
    lebesaahjk
    hsbwoghrgi
    otflfxlwvk
    bkdfrfkhqo
    blwtrwgnxr
    wiguvmvxdw
    nrrqtgjmsa
    xhikgravof
    gqfhomekww
    lpujsjueqe
    khphskpsqw
    gmqrviftul
    oxcwmkkjmf
    ilthhoklht
    iwvnirnipu
    mmggswercq
    emrmliqpcs
    xcafnoxaep
    hudsvgkfus
    srtmjndpiq
    rtpcqgxvpb
    uqwdttnhtg
    mskslnbusq
    axjthjhnov
    himroelufo
    lgvbbbduru
    kqqxbcwkrn
    gwxiwaglud
    vodnncrbtv
    jvcxigrdok
    jowfpjnawl
    mdnptofjji
    lvaesaxhik
    gravofgqfh
    omekwwlpuj
    sjueqekhph
    skpsqwgmqr
    viftuloxcw
    mkkjmfilth
    hoklhtiwvn
    irnipummgg
    swercqemrm
    liqpcsxcaf
    noxaephuds
    vgkfussrtm
    jndpiqrtpc
    qgxvpbuqwd
    ttnhtgmsks
    lnbusqaxjt
    hjhnovhimr
    oelufolgvb
    bbdurukqqx
    bcwkrngwxi
    wagludvodn
    ncrbtvjvcx
    igrdokjowf
    pjnawlmdnp
    tofjjilvae
    saxhikgrav
    ofgqfhomek
    wwlpujsjue
    qekhphskps
    qwgmqrvift
    uloxcwmkkj
    mfilthhokl
    htiwvnirni
    pummggswer
    cqemrmliqp
    csxonsccmn
    retjqhktxs
    jghgibwbpe
    veghdpetlj
    enjflqiicu
    itahwgacoi
    henlwitwuc
    dkuubfdrai
    sdatkoonqj
    gjxffmoplx
    gctlmvkmta
    jpkdqccpgo
    hjvjpmutfq
    dxvdlrdwcn
    labqbeidrv
    wvxknqgmmu
    vxtgnkcstf
    sucbrxllxd
    jwhwjrfrwt
    euhxehfksb
    ffkvsijadl
    pkbxxwbsva
    iuudwauhvl
    kcugbveiaa
    sshlrgpfqb
    gbxvfeohmo
    nsccmnretj
    qhktxsjghg
    ibwbpevegh
    dpetljenjf
    lqiicuitah
    wgacoihenl
    witwucdkuu
    bfdraisdat
    koonqjgjxf
    fmoplxgctl
    mvkmtajpkd
    qccpgohjvj
    pmutfqdxvd
    lrdwcnlabq
    beidrvwvxk
    nqgmmuvxtg
    nkcstfsucb
    rxllxdjwhw
    jrfrwteuhx
    ehfksbffkv
    sijadlpkbx
    xwbsvaiuud
    wauhvlkcug
    bveiaasshl
    rgpfqbgbxv
    feohmonscc
    mnretjqhkt
    xsjghgibwb
    peveghdpet
    ljenjflqii
    cuitahwgac
    oihenlwitw
    ucdkuubfdk
    rclusndiih
    jcxcrwwghj
    fqxumefpeg
    mrdjdvjuti
    aibdpdifon
    xjvrpuelvp
    uhestktvbu
    lppprehkag
    gnpqmahdum
    nwlouskree
    rvdqbpclxl
    qnwoarwaxe
    mtwxdombcr
    ufjetqrqsl
    osbonvqrob
    ofetoatpvc
    ssmmbfkxix
    ksasroxvia
    figmtughlw
    ndkbenqmca
    axctqtjvpw
    abvjwmfdwh
    dwfkcbuncm
    sbqasthcbw
    gfpcnqotve
    nosxvkrclu
    sndiihjcxc
    rwwghjfqxu
    mefpegmrdj
    dvjutiaibd
    pdifonxjvr
    puelvpuhes
    tktvbulppp
    rehkaggnpq
    mahdumnwlo
    uskreervdq
    bpclxlqnwo
    arwaxemtwx
    dombcrufje
    tqrqslosbo
    nvqrobofet
    oatpvcssmm
    bfkxixksas
    roxviafigm
    tughlwndkb
    enqmcaaxct
    qtjvpwabvj
    wmfdwhdwfk
    cbuncmsbqa
    sthcbwgfpc
    nqotvenosx
    vkrclusndi
    ihjcxcrwwg
    hjfqxumefp
    egmrdjdvju
    tiaibdpdsp
    awjtgdbgov
    hbfqoeetfh
    lgvbbadnru
    kqpxbcwkrn
    gvxivxgeuc
    oodhnblbmu
    iucxhakdhk
    ioweijnawl
    mdgptoeccc
    evadlxxhcd
    xlaonfajfb
    hmeewwkouj
    sjuekedajh
    skpsqvfgqq
    vixmulowcv
    mkkjlfbfth
    aijlhsiwpn
    hrmiptllfx
    mwekckdfrm
    kiqpblxbaf
    gnxaejgudm
    vgdxnrsrtm
    jmciiprsoc
    jgwopaoqwd
    ntnhtffsjr
    lnbnspawjt
    gdbgovhbfq
    oeetfhlgvb
    badnrukqpx
    bcwkrngvxi
    vxgeucoodh
    nblbmuiucx
    hakdhkiowe
    ijnawlmdgp
    toecccevad
    lxxhcdxlao
    nfajfbhmee
    wwkoujsjue
    kedajhskps
    qvfgqqvixm
    ulowcvmkkj
    lfbfthaijl
    hsiwpnhrmi
    ptllfxmwek
    ckdfrmkiqp
    blxbafgnxa
    ejgudmvgdx
    nrsrtmjmci
    iprsocjgwo
    paoqwdntnh
    tffsjrlnbn
    spawjtgdbg
    ovuosfdqri
    ruatjoonpc
    fjxfemnplw
    fctklvkmsr
    jpddqtboxo
    bjvjomumxp
    uxvdkrvvcn
    kabqtehcrp
    porknqammt
    pqmandcsnw
    snuarqklxd
    jwhvirwrqn
    vugxehfkss
    efjumbixcl
    pkbwxwaror
    hunuwxuhvl
    dbugbvdiaa
    smalqxoxqs
    gaxufdoalo
    mstcmnrwtj
    qbktqlcggg
    ibwbpvvegh
    dpwsldence
    lqbictissh
    wgacncheml
    witpotdkuo
    sfdqriruat
    joonpcfjxf
    emnplwfctk
    lvkmsrjpdd
    qtboxobjvj
    omumxpuxvd
    krvvcnkabq
    tehcrppork
    nqammtpqma
    ndcsnwsnua
    rqklxdjwhv
    irwrqnvugx
    ehfkssefju
    mbixclpkbw
    xwarorhunu
    wxuhvldbug
    bvdiaasmal
    qxoxqsgaxu
    fdoalomstc
    mnrwtjqbkt
    qlcgggibwb
    pvveghdpws
    ldencelqbi
    ctisshwgac
    ncheednxlh
    fltblgkvti
    jajmqlbfgf
    hsvaouudfg
    dovskcdnce
    kjbhtthlrg
    pgrbnbgdme
    phmpnscjnn
    sfcqriltxs
    jhhgicfiqe
    elgiepftsk
    eojfmqiicc
    ptboxnajoj
    hfnmwpuwvc
    kkuvbmdrap
    sdhcqopoqj
    gjxmfmoplx
    mdtrmvrnta
    qqkeqcipgo
    ikwqpmvtgq
    dgeklseejn
    lbiqclidsw
    wvarnrhnmu
    wxthokdsuf
    sudhrxrlak
    jwowprfrxu
    ednxlhfltb
    lgkvtijajm
    qlbfgfhsva
    ouudfgdovs
    kcdncekjbh
    tthlrgpgrb
    nbgdmephmp
    nscjnnsfcq
    riltxsjhhg
    icfiqeelgi
    epftskeojf
    mqiiccptbo
    xnajojhfnm
    wpuwvckkuv
    bmdrapsdhc
    qopoqjgjxm
    fmoplxmdtr
    mvrntaqqke
    qcipgoikwq
    pmvtgqdgek
    lseejnlbiq
    clidswwvar
    nrhnmuwxth
    okwopanpwd
    mtngtffsjr
    lmanspxwjt
    gcagovgbfq
    odetehlgub
    bacnqukqpx
    acwjqngvwi
    vxfeucoocg
    mbkbmuiubx
    hxkchkinve
    iinavlmdgo
    sneccbevad
    lxxgcdxkao
    nfxjfahldd
    vvkoujsite
    jedaihrkpr
    qvffpquhwm
    tknwcvmjkj
    lebeshahjk
    hshwomhrmi
    otllfxlwdk
    bjdfrlkhqo
    blwbxfgnxa
    eigudmvgdw
    nrrqtmjmci
    iprsocjfwo
    panpwdmtng
    tffsjrlman
    spxwjtgcag
    ovgbfqodet
    ehlgubbacn
    qukqpxacwj
    qngvwivxfe
    ucoocgmbkb
    muiubxhxkc
    hkinveiina
    vlmdgosnec
    cbevadlxxg
    cdxkaonfxj
    fahlddvvko
    ujsitejeda
    ihrkprqvff
    pquhwmtknw
    cvmjkjlebe
    shahjkhshw
    omhrmiotll
    fxlwdkbjdf
    dvurcalvil
    joqxjjosqf
    nvhpnixddc
    fwswmsrbce
    alspixakxb
    imwewqfpod
    tduwkwdbji
    seqmkqxgql
    pcxnoforuq
    gklkmxcftb
    biklhtcxph
    irhjpogmaa
    mqwlukwgsg
    lirjtmrusx
    horswjhvvm
    paexommlng
    knvjjqlnju
    kaxpjtokqv
    nnhhuagtes
    fntnmjsrdu
    bdbhppbcgr
    iwfuximhvt
    ttvoloeqkr
    tuqerhawrc
    wsafvvpivh
    nultnpdvur
    calviljoqx
    jjosqfnvhp
    nixddcfwsw
    msrbcealsp
    ixakxbimwe
    wqfpodtduw
    kwdbjiseqm
    kqxgqlpcxn
    oforuqgklk
    mxcftbbikl
    htcxphirhj
    pogmaamqwl
    ukwgsglirj
    tmrusxhors
    wjhvvmpaex
    ommlngknvj
    jqlnjukaxp
    jtokqvnnhh
    uagtesfntn
    bwhfqinqou
    deootgvlsj
    mvatkiihkd
    adrfwgijfr
    gunlgplgns
    kjevkuciai
    bdpkjgonxk
    vawdflvwch
    fsbktecvlp
    qprkhkaggo
    pqnaheumnx
    moublrlfre
    dqiqjlxlqn
    wuhrebxemt
    fxepmcdsdf
    jetxxxbmps
    ioovxauipl
    euvgtwecsb
    mmbflajxkt
    gtavfwibgi
    hmudghlwuj
    kbenrmcaba
    ctwcjwvfab
    vjwnmdwhdx
    fkccuujmsh
    qhscicbwhf
    qinqoudeoo
    tgvlsjmvat
    kiihkdadrf
    wgijfrgunl
    gplgnskjev
    kuciaibdpk
    jgonxkvawd
    flvwchfsbk
    tecvlpqprk
    hkaggopqna
    heumnxmoub
    lrlfredqiq
    jlxlqnwuhr
    ebxemtfxep
    mcdsdfjetx
    xxbmpsioov
    xauipleuvg
    twuskqeerv
    cpapckwkqn
    vnaqvawems
    wxdolbcruf
    iesqqqslor
    bnnuqrnboe
    dtoxtovcss
    mmaekxiwks
    xsrowviafi
    gltugglvnc
    kbdmqlcaax
    bsptjvowxb
    viwmfdvhcw
    ejbbtncmsa
    qarthcawgf
    pbnpotudno
    sxukrclurm
    dhhhjcxcqw
    wfhieqxume
    foegmrdjdv
    jttixhbdpd
    ifomxjurpu
    elvptgersj
    tvbulppord
    gkagfnpqma
    hdulmwlnus
    kqeervcpap
    ckwkqnvnaq
    vawemswxdo
    lbcrufiesq
    qqslorbnnu
    qrnboedtox
    tovcssmmae
    kxiwksxsro
    wviafigltu
    gglvnckbdm
    qlcaaxbspt
    jvowxbviwm
    fdvhcwejbb
    tncmsaqart
    hcawgfpbnp
    otudnosxud
    ltfolgvbba
    duqukqpxbc
    wkrngvxivx
    gkucuodnmb
    rbsuiucxhg
    qcokioweoj
    nawlmdmpto
    eijikvadrx
    xgijgravnf
    gqfhnmekww
    koujsjueqe
    jgphskpsqv
    fmqqvhftul
    nwcvmkkjlf
    ilthhojlhs
    iwvnhrmipt
    llffswercq
    dmrmkiqpbs
    xbafnnxaep
    gudsvgkftr
    rrtmjmcpip
    rsocpgwupa
    uqwdttnhtf
    lsjrlnbtsp
    awjtgjhnov
    hhmqodltfo
    lgvbbaduqu
    kqpxbcwkrn
    gvxivxgkuc
    uodnmbrbsu
    iucxhgqcok
    ioweojnawl
    mdmptoeiji
    kvadrxxgij
    gravnfgqfh
    nmekwwkouj
    sjueqejgph
    skpsqvfmqq
    vhftulnlpk
    bwxwaruahu
    tdwxuhvlkb
    ugbvdiaass
    hlqfofqaga
    xufdogloms
    ccmnretjqh
    ktwsiggfib
    wbpdveghdp
    esljenjelq
    iictisahwg
    abnihemlwi
    twubdktubf
    dqxircatjo
    onpifjxfem
    nplwfctklv
    kmsxjpjdpc
    bogohjvjom
    utfpdxvckr
    dvcnkabqbe
    hcrvvvxknq
    gmmtvwsgnj
    cstesucaqx
    klxdjwhvir
    frwteugxeh
    fksbefjush
    ixclpkbwxw
    aruahutdwx
    uhvlkbugbv
    diaasshlqf
    ofqagaxufd
    oglomsccmn
    retjqhktws
    iggfibwbpd
    veghdpeslj
    enjelqiict
    isahwgalxs
    rowvhrfhgl
    ntfgkpmcjs
    dmjftxaxbs
    psioovxavi
    pmeuvhuwej
    tbtnbmlapx
    rthtavgepb
    mjhmudnhlw
    ukkblnrmdh
    hgjtxcqwwf
    hieqxtmefo
    dfmkciuujn
    tirhscodif
    ngqjoqouel
    optgersjmv
    bukiiikdgj
    rffnijfrgu
    tlgplhnskk
    eequcpapck
    qkjgpnaqva
    wdlmwwdofs
    crueidsqqp
    slhlbngopr
    naoevtnxso
    vbrrlfsekq
    iqjlxsrowv
    hrfhglntfg
    kpmcjsdmjf
    txaxbspsio
    ovxavipmeu
    vhuwejtbtn
    bmlapxrtht
    avgepbmjhm
    udcualjwxo
    acgbquutvi
    lpflkstvre
    libqrdqsbx
    pvjjwchufu
    hpdpuscsfv
    cfdjqxddit
    qghwbknixv
    vuxqtwgssb
    vwsgtjiate
    atchxwrrfj
    pendoxexwt
    dcmfknlqaa
    klpcshofir
    vqhefegxux
    nctdegcndr
    jhcmhdjogg
    asgrxfvfwa
    mgfclkugru
    sabistxebp

  32. how about different types? by CrudPuppy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I find it extremely annoying that varying types
    of SCSI terminators with the same number of pins
    are not labeled by the OEM as HVD, LVD, etc...

    I have a zillion terminators here for normal SCSI
    devices and a few HVD for my tape libraries and
    it's impossible to determine (to my knowledge)
    which is which... ugh

    --
    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
  33. In the book's defense... by KC7GR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The reviewer comments that there may actually be too much information in the book, and that newcomers to the subject of SCSI may get lost. My response is that the book itself was never really written for beginners; It was written, IMO, as a technical reference for folks who are in the range between decently hardware-literate (able to build a system without too much trouble) and engineering technician. Witness the oscilloscope examples. How many would-be SCSI users in the Joe/Jane Consumer arena have even seen an O-scope, let alone could guess how to use one or what they're useful for?

    Speaking as a second-year EE student, and as someone who's spent 20+ years doing hands-on with all kinds of electronics, the book came as a very welcome reference for me. I would not, however, recommend it for someone who just wants to find out enough about SCSI just to make use of it. For that, I would suggest http://www.scsifaq.org

    I would suggest to the reviewer to place a book in context before writing said review. It just plain looks better in print.

    --

    Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

    Blue Feather Technologies

  34. SCSI over IP... what about IP over SCSI? by Eg0r · · Score: 3, Informative
    The project's home is here but hasn't been updated in a lonnnng time.

    Basically, take 2 computers with a scsi card in each, and use a scsi cable to connect the two machines. I don't know how this solution compares to myrinet or gigabit ethernet in terms of performance, but the idea is a nice one.

    --
    "Hasta la victoria siempre!" El Comandante
  35. they already HAVE hit the ceiling by CrudPuppy · · Score: 2

    if you will notice that most of the more recent
    SCSI devices have gone to the LVD technology...

    this is due to the fact that every time a faster
    SCSI standard emerged, the max cable length was
    reduced to a fraction of the previous standard.

    LVD and HVD were introduced to combat this problem
    while maintaining speed. I'm not sure about the
    max cable length of LVD, but HVD is at least 25
    meters max length, which makes it more than sufficient for
    future desktop devices should cable lengths start
    to again shrink with future speed increases...

    --
    A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
    1. Re:they already HAVE hit the ceiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not all that sure that shorter cable lengths is such a disadvantage. I'm now using an iMac with USB and FireWire only, but that's mainly because it's still a bargain. Remember the equation: one foot equals one nanosecond, or one metre equals three nanoseconds, so one clock tick even from a 333 MHz machine can only travel one metre before the next tick starts out.

    2. Re:they already HAVE hit the ceiling by Shimbo · · Score: 2
      I'm not sure about the max cable length of LVD, but HVD is at least 25

      Assuming you don't use Ultra2 or above. HVD is at most 25m; and doesn't support Ultra160 at all.

    3. Re:they already HAVE hit the ceiling by Shimbo · · Score: 2
      Remember the equation: one foot equals one nanosecond, or one metre equals three nanoseconds, so one clock tick even from a 333 MHz machine can only travel one metre before the next tick starts out.

      Generally speaking the bulk data is transferred in synchronous mode i.e. with a window like TCP. I doubt a few nanoseconds delay would make much difference.

      The limit for SE SCSI went down to 1.5m. Add 0.5m internal wiring in each box and you could effectively only add one external peripheral a max of 0.5m away!

    4. Re:they already HAVE hit the ceiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LVD and HVD were introduced to combat this problem

      Almost correct. HVD was there from the beginning. The problem with HVD is that the high power required meant that the transceivers couldn't be embedded in the protocol chip. Add an external transceiver chip, and you (1) add cost and (2) introduce timing skews that make higher speeds (40 Megatransfers/s and beyond) difficult or impossible to achieve. With LVD it became possible to integrate the transceivers into the protocol chip, which helped out with both problems.

      As a bonus, you got backwards compatibility: The LVD transceivers could be designed to support two modes so that the same chip could switch from LVD mode to single-ended mode (though at a performance penalty since speed would have to be stepped down) if an older SE device was detected.

  36. This post will bring you luck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    But it is your choice whether the luck will be good or bad! Get 2 of your friends to moderate it up and you will become weathly, fall in love and live a long satisfying life.

    If you moderate this post down, terrible things will befall you and those you care about. Your closest friend will fall ill, your pet will die and you will be condemed to a life of pain and suffering. Choose wisely.

    1. Re:This post will bring you luck! by esper_child · · Score: 1

      heh, funny this hasn't been touched with a -1 offtopic yet.

      Although it does seem to be an interesting idea of a way to get a post of yours up a few points using the stupidity of others.

  37. I use SCSI all the time now I can get it cheap... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    since I discovered that ACARD make a range of SCSI to IDE bridges I've switched over to using SCSI on my machines. I can use standard IDE drives (like a 80GB Quantum Fireball Plus AS) with a little bridge (ACARD AEC7720U/UW) and get good speeds. I use 8 drives in one PC for massive storage of divX's, MP3's, Iso's & VCD's.

    Here in the UK PC500.net have them for starting £50. That's a big saving when you need lots of storage.

    I got my Book of SCSI from Border's because after picking it up I didn't want to have to wait for Amazon to deliver it. It's a shame that I know something about SCSI I'm tempted to use FireWire anyway <g>

  38. New Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is how I pronounce GNU/Linux

  39. Hey! Don't count out those old EISA boxes! by rnturn · · Score: 2

    ``When was the last time you used VLB or EISA?''


    I'll bet that there's still quite a few EISA systems alive and kicking out there (maybe hidden behind some drywall :-) ).

    I had one on the home network up until just last month. It was, alas, decommissioned it after ten years of service and replaced with a PIII/733. Originally, purchased with an Adaptec 1740 adapter (later switched to a 2740) and 420MB of disk space (later up to 12GB) to run Coherent and SVR4.2, it ran various flavors of Linux (mostly Slackware and RedHat) beginning in 1996. If it weren't for what appeared to be problems developing with the memory (hard to find that old stuff) it'd probably still be performing some useful function on the home network. (I haven't tossed it yet so there's still that possibility.)

    Cheers...

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  40. Amen, Brother... by FatSean · · Score: 1

    I'd mod you up if I could.

    --
    Blar.
  41. I have both SCSI and IDE on the same computer.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a clone server running NT4. I find that the IDE runs faster, has more space, and was cheaper.
    Right now I have a Maxtor (Promise) ATA 100 controller (that I got free when I bought the two Maxtor 45 gig ATA 100 drives for 119.00 each) which has been modified for hardware RAID operation (takes about 10 minutes and requires two 100 ohm resistors). I also have four 9.1 gig IBM LVD SCSI drives connected to an Adaptec 2940 U2W SCSI controller. These are set up as a stripe set with parity (Raid 5). It gives me 27 gigs of backed up storage. Not only did the entire IDE system cost less then the Adaptec controller by itself, but it has almost twice the storage, runs much faster and fits entirely within the server cabinet. Not to mention that I can add two more IDE drives to the controller to have a bigger RAID system or a third drive to have redundant RAID (if a drive was to fail the controller would automatically create a mirror on the third drive). RAID was great before the advent of super size ATA-100 drives and cheap Hardware RAID IDE controllers, but now it's simply showing it's age (and high cost).

  42. Re:Random Lameness Generator Beats Lameness Filter by CmdrTaco+on · · Score: 0

    Aha! You found the list of every password CmdrTaco has ever used. Impressive cracking skills, my brotha.

    --

    saru mo ki kara ochiru

  43. This is a valuable book by Captain+Chad · · Score: 1

    I purchased this book before it was published and promptly read it from cover to cover when I received it. Using that knowledge, I was able to help an out-of-state friend fix his system. At the time, he could connect his scanner or his CD-RW drive, but not both at the same time. The problem turned out to be that the scanner had a single-ended, 25-pin Mac-style connector and was messing up the rest of the system. Once we configured his host adapter correctly, and got the scanner connected to the end of the bus with a short cable and appropriate terminators, his problems were fixed.

    The path of SCSI standards is convoluted. And this book does an extremely good job of sorting though it all and presenting it in an understandable manner.

    Highly recommended.

    -- Chad

    --
    Check out Chad's News
  44. scsi chicken entrails by cosmo7 · · Score: 1

    i once had one external scsi drive that needed a terminator if it sat on one side of the computer but not if i put it on the other. freaky.

    isn't part of firewire/1394 actually based on scsi?

  45. Appalling by Animats · · Score: 2

    The concept of needing a 400 page book for end users of SCSI devices is appalling.

    1. Re:Appalling by EveryTroll · · Score: 0

      This book is not for end-users. All the end user needs to know is that the terminator goes on the END of the cable, and that knowledge is to much for em.

      --
      I am here to protect you from the terrible secret of goatse! Do not trust the Giver Robot!
  46. Re:Hey! Don't count out those old EISA boxes! by p3bf · · Score: 1

    > maybe hidden behind some drywall

    Ooooh... The Black Cat of computing...

    --
    Slashdot: Everything in Moderation, including Moderation itself.
  47. SCSI vs IDE.... Just look at the MTBF. by maaaaanis · · Score: 1

    Sorry to be provocative here but there seems to be a number of people extolling the virtues of IDE over SCSI whilst overlooking one of the most important features:
    Mean Time Before Failure.
    If you go to your favourite disk manufacturer, here's mine: http://www.seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/inde x/1,1123,,00.html
    and compare the MTBF values of IDE and SCSI drives, you'll see a glaring difference.
    One comparrison that stands out:
    Cheeetah 73LP(Fibre Chan 160): 1,200,000-hour MTBF
    Barracuda ATA III (IDE 40): 500,000 hour MTBF

    Reliability and seek times are the main differences not capacity and burst speeds which is why they are still the only real choice for proffessional video/audio systems.

  48. Re:Hey! Don't count out those old EISA boxes! by Keeper+ofthe+Keys · · Score: 1
    I still have both running...

    • ALR VEISA 433 - The hard disk died on it years ago, but it runs as a TV-SVGA converter so I can watch DVDs on the projector from the office. Right now it boots off of a 360KB 5-1/4" Floppy to MS-DOS 6.0 and auto-runs the TSR.
    • VLB - This is my pride and joy:
      • 486 DX 50 MHz (NOT dx2, DX!)
      • VLB runs at 50 MHz native as opposed to 33 MHz on DX2 and DX4 systems
      • 40 MB, 70ns, 30 pin SIMMS
      • Promise Ultra IDE controller with 16MB disk cache onboard
      • ATI VGAWonderXL (with the passthru header)


    The VLB system still runs as a netware print server, happily chugging away after ~7 years.
  49. This could have been a more valuable book by llywrch · · Score: 2

    I bought this book about a year ago, & also read it cover-to-cover. It is good in explaining the hardware issues with SCSI, but it hads a major oversight.

    When it talked about Operating Systems, & SCSI programming, it was extremely Wintel centric.

    The point of my criticism is not that Fields, et alia, devoted room to getting SCSI to work with Windows 95, NT & 2000, but that they kept in a number of pages from the first edition that talked about SCSI & DOS. (Who is going to lay out several hundred dollars in hardware then run an antiquated OS with it?) This wouldn't be so irritating if it weren't for how little some space they devoted to UNIX-like systems -- less than five pages in total, which amounted to saying ``there are issues, & learn what they are by talking to your OS vendor."

    The authors devoted an entire chapter to writing SCSI drivers under Windows using one vendor's SDK, but failed to even mention that one could study how to code for UNIX by looking at *BSD or Linux code -- that was available for study to all.

    And as pathetic as the UNIX coverage was, Mac SCSI users received only a pair of by-the-way mentions in the text. And the hardware discussions focussed on common, Intel-based systems; for instance, there is no mention of the Mac 25-pin SCSI cable. Perhaps a beginning SysAdmin could use Appendix A to troubleshoot her/his Sparc, PowerPC, or Alpha systems, but I would recommend Evi Nemeth, et alia _Unix System Administration Handbook_ as the first reference to turn to. Nemeth's book discusses much of the same hardware issues in less space, & in a far more hardware-agnostic manner.

    And the material on the CD, although Linux-oreinted, is out of date -- as a simple ``ls -l" will show.

    There are strengths in this book, but the weaknesses in it bothered me far more. I hope in the next edition much of the DOS-related stuff is flushed out, & far more useful UNIX-related information is included. And that would make it a definite buy for any computer nerd's library, instead of a strong maybe.

    Geoff

    --
    I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
  50. Got FIbre Channel? by Diesel+Dave · · Score: 1

    http://www.cinonic.com/

    Yes a shameless plug...

  51. Packetized? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does the book have any coverage of packetized SCSI (aka information units, though I'm not fond of this term)?

    Packetized SCSI is a really neat idea; it's a cleaner protocol and cuts down overhead significantly. It was proposed years ago, but lost out to a competing (IMO inferior) protocol for 160 MB/s. It will appear in 320 MB/s products, however.

    Unfortunately it's still not on the market yet (is it?) and who knows if there is enough life left in SCSI for it to make a big impact. (I mean life as far as future generations of SCSI evolution; there will probably be SCSI products of the current generation for years to come.)

  52. Re:Hey! Don't count out those old EISA boxes! by Raven667 · · Score: 2

    I use my IBM Model 8595 PS/2 for many things including Firewall, HTTP Proxy, NFS & Samba, DNS, VPN, DHCP, SMTP & IMAP, SSH, etc. It has ~27 GB of SCSI disks inside and outside of the frame. Not bad for a 486-50 with 64MB RAM.

    --
    -- Remember: Wherever you go, there you are!
  53. Up yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up homo. Why not tell us how hard you get when you pull out a 3-inch floppy instead of a five and a halfer?

  54. Sounds like it works for you by flatrock · · Score: 2

    Wow, it sounds like you actually have a use for all that stuff. It sounds strange to me to have it all on one system. It seems like keeping it all working would take a significat amount of your time. It also leasves you with one point of failure for all those different tasks. Maybe in your case this all makes sense.

    The drives could (admittedly) be replaced by a newer drive configuration (I have a pair of 75GB SCSI waiting to replace all), but I keep putting it off and depending on my DAT24 backups because the move will be a pain and will shut me down (by completely occupying my attention and waiting for everything to copy) for a day or two while I make the switch.

    I can imagine that if I got all that equipmet working well together, I wouldn't want to play with it any more than I had to either. If it works, don't screw with it is a good rule to live by in many cases. If you decide you don't need those 75 GB SCSI drives sitting around taking up space, let me know.