Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IDE, SCSI And Recording Everything

Posted by timothy on from the snobbery-reverse-snobbery-and-reality dept.

Raju writes: "For many years we were told that SCSI is superior to IDE. I always made my systems with SCSI and the others in the household got el-cheapo IDE disks. In the past SCSI beat IDE hands-down but now according to Simson Garfinkel, "today's IDE drives are significantly faster than SCSI drives". In the article at O'Reilly Network he talks about the tests they had run for storage of network data on disks. In the light of this article does anyone see any reason for going with SCSI in a desktop machine? For servers with heavy disk usage patterns it might be different due to command queuing." Disk types aren't what the article's really about, though -- it's a top-level look at network forensics (including advice on building a traffic-analysis system), and makes some interesting points about the unbalanced growth of storage and bandwidth.

3 of 532 comments (clear)

  1. Depends on the OS as well by PimpNinjaWannaBee · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    What system to go with depends on what OS you have on your desktop computer. Do you run for example Windows XP all heavy IDE-disc-operations makes your computer a real pain in the *ss to work with. To avoid this, SCSI could be nice. (I think Windows 2000 was alot better in this aspect). With a good OS like Linux there is no problem though.

  2. Re:SCSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It's about defending your overly expensive purchase of SCSI over IDE so you don't feel like a stupid clod.

  3. Re:The age-old debate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    When you've found five of the dozen or so things wrong with your statement feel free to come back and try again.

    Thanks for playing.