Slashdot Mirror
Pioneer DVR-A05 Review
kila_m writes "
Over at DVD Writers
we have the world's first review of the
recently announced Pioneer DVR-A05 DVD writer. It supports
4 speed DVD-R writing, 2 speed DVD-RW, 16 speed CD-R and is
able to write to CD-RW disks at 8 speed. The review is based on a
pre-release unit and is fairly comprehensive.
" The review itself is one level deeper.
how foobar speed DVD relates to foobar speed CD?
:-)
Who will be the first to announce a DVD recorder that is 56x *
* Oh, by the way, that's equivillant to 56x CD, added by our marketing department
Also, as DVDs are thinner than CDs, can they spin faster without breaking???
I'm still waiting for Pioneer (or anyone) to make a slot-loading CD-RW / DVD-RW/+RW drive. Their slot loading DVD drives are fantastic.
Nobody seems to make them. Does anyone know if there's a reason why?
Does anyone know if this is an ATAPI burner? Can it be used by existing software?
We are using the DVR A03 here for backup purposes and hacking together Linux DVDs. I must say that this device really is great. Pioneer support is also quite good. The writer died a couple of weeks ago, but an exchange device came only a few days later.
And with DVD-R media at about 3,- EUR and DVD-RW at 6,- it also becomes a feasible alternative to CD-R/RW. The old DVR A03 also costs "only" 300,- EUR now. That's a price many people might be willing to pay, and when the DVR A05 hits the stores, I think prices will fall even more.
[--- PGP key and more on http://www.root42.de ---]
I hope that I actually get the manual in the complete release:
"The package contains:
1 x Pioneer DVR-105 DVD Writer
1 x Manual (online) "
I'd have to say that it looks good, even the cons section had an awful lot of items solved by having a second read-only drive (which you usually have).
When on the subject I'd like to discuss a reliability issue. Burned CDs, and even more CDRWs, have a tendency to break after a while (don't expect a CDRW to hold data more than 1-2 years). Judging from the added complexity I doubt that burned DVDs are better. How does a burned DVD rate as a backup media? What is the error rate compared to your average tape?
It looks like this Christmas could be a good one for DVD writer sales. The price-point is now pretty reasonable for Joe Consumer. What's the state of the DVD editing/authoring software? I wonder if a highly rated bundle of a DVD writer and well reviewed software for Christmas could move enough units to begin to influence the war over recordable DVD formats...
I am just wondering how many more Atapi drives have to come out before they phase of that stupid 1/8" Jack nad Volume control that no-one uses. Would make them easier to paint and mod.
Of course everyone reading this probably uses them. I personaly never ever have.
Where's the SCSI version? Seriously, why does it seem as CD-R/DVD-R drive manufacturers are abandoning SCSI? I realise that the dude who's getting a Dell has IDE and they probably sell more of those. I also realise the people out there who don't want to spend the extra cash on SCSI have a say in this. I further realise that there will be people who will say that they've never had a problem with IDE burners and good for them. I have had nothing but trouble with them and I will never purchase another again...
SCSI burners work better and tend to last longer, although the only metric I have are my Plextors who have lasted a few years now. This is versus HP IDE burners which have both failed.
So... Where's the SCSI version? Last time I checked, Plextor was the last reliable SCSI CD-RW drive vendor out there. Who/what/why would you recommend today? Are there any benefits to IDE burners (technically for the IDE interface, not just because they're newer and faster) over the SCSI counterparts?
Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
For one thing, the complexity of the electronics they've got to jam in the drive goes up because they need hardware to interpret CD and DVD. Also, there are something like three different wavelengths to support with the laser (CD-R, CD-RW, and DVD) IIRC.
Technically, the drive will be capable of spinning both at the same speed, but it's the interpretation of the data that comes in that is the limiting factor in this case.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
DVDs are too little too late. They've been "on hold" for too long to be the next-gen data-storage solution. If DVDs are supposed to stay around for a few years, how are 4.7 GB supposed to be enough? Harddisks are already too big to be backupped to DVD and it's only getting worse. Compare the 1000-fold increase in storage capacity of harddisks over the last decade with the meager 7-fold increase from CD to DVD. I think that DVD is a very short-lived phenomenon.
How much? I have yet to buy a DVD burner because I can't justify the cost..(OK..my wife won't let me...but that's neither here not there:))
Is this a sun-$200 unit, or do I have to wait years for that to occur?
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
Heck, I've got audio cd-rs that I burned a few years back that are still fine, even though they've spent quite a bit of time in the car.
Best Slashdot Co
there are so many statements not available in th US - look the way those guys at dvdwriters.co.uk write about duping safedisk-protected CD with Pioneer DVR-A05 with actual game titles, and blatantly testing DVD-ripping on it.
Hemos looks this further, laughing out loud you slashdot people laughing him about moronic posting of some review. At least he wants us to believe that until now.
Does it support both +R and -R discs?
I'm waiting for one of the standards to go away or both to merge in all drives (betamax-fobia).
Hi
For a long time I misconsidered buying a DVD burner as there were many different formats, technologies and also media prices issues involved.
Now, if I burn a DVD on this stuff, will it still be readable on another PC's lambda DVD player ?
Is there something specific to know about this ?
What about region-locking ?
Can I easily duplicate my own DVD (and DeCSS these on the fly, BTW caus' I want my backups not to suffer from such idiot protection scheme) ?
Thanks
Trolling using another account since 2005.
I'm just thrilled that it writes CDRs at 16x...I'm using an 8x notebook burner now, so I was resolved not to take a hit in speed when I get an external DVD writer. At 16x I think a lot of people can finally get one drive for all their burning needs, rather than a seperate CDRW and DVD-R.
There will be exceptions, if you need (or think you need) superfast burning. but this is welcome news.
Putting this together with last weeks "Philip's SFFO 3cm 4Gig Optical Discs" story and now you have a choice of watching 5 2 hour movies or streaming 1080i HDTV over your cell phone. Who's going to have time to make phone calls?
"I went on a diet, swore off drinking and heavy eating. And in fourteen days, I had lost exactly two weeks. Joe E. Lewis
The answer is "no". SCSI may be slightly faster, but not enough to be worth the price difference. My cd-r ( a Philips) burned each iso of red hat 8 in about 3 minutes. A SCSI burner may have gotten that down to 2:45. But if that 15 seconds per cd is really that important, because you're burning so many of them, then you need a cd-duplicator, not a burner. IDE speed is so high that you spend more time setting up the burn then you actually spend burning it.
The only place SCSI is marginally useful is in RAID systems on your server, and even there it's only cost effective if you are running a system with thousands of users.
Best Slashdot Co
Thus, there is no real standard for "generic" 2x discs; those that claim to be are either re-labeled (and expensive) or (speculation) have "fake" identifiers -- the quality and compatability varies greatly, but suffice to say, most are quite poor.
Though, I did say that consumer DVD-R is here: Princo ($0.66) and Ritek ($1.00) both make fine (and cheap) 1x discs which can be burned at 2x using a "hacked" firmware. My experience suggests that Princo 1x media are good for 2x, although set-top compatability seems to suffer. Many have reported good luck with Riteks, although I've had poor luck with discs over 4.00 GB (full capacity is 4.38 GB).
i thought not
is only to serve as a warning to others.
Don't get sucked in by a low priced HP DVD i100 burner. I picked one up to create ghost images for our SE's demo laptops. With the latest bios, drivers, etc - I've found two DVD-ROM's that will actually read a burned CD. Unfortunately, that does not include any of the IBM think pads, Dell latitudes, or any other Dell workstation in our shop.
For $99, HP will 'update' the drive to make it work with DVD-R's. That is another stinky issue since they advertised it worked with the -R media, but I'm OK with DVD-RW media if it actually was readable by anything I picked it up for. The box said it ran under Win2K server - it does, but only as a DVD-ROM. The burning software only 'works' with Win2K workstation and below. Customer Service was less than helpful.
Rather than spend the $99 and hope - We picked up a Pioneer unit (not the one in this review, but don't remember the number) and have had no problems. Fool me once...
+++ UGUCAUCGUAUUUCU
~30% of current set-top players don't work, but you can be sure that future models will, and the DVD format will be around for a long time. Most newer PC DVD-ROMs work as well.
And the media simply isn't expensive. Good blanks can be had for $0.70 in quantities of a hundred.
PS: "The PS2" is comes in many production variants: some play DVD-R; some don't.
Yeah, I know, it's flamebait, but I feel it's true. SCSI had a time and place where it looked superior. But now, CPU usage for hdds is negligible, 150mbit/s transfer rates *pr* disk with SATA is on par with SCSI and ATA RAID is everywhere.
In fact I'm surprised why there are no ATA 10k+ RPM drives today. Personally I think there's a marked collusion, as in "if one starts making it we'll all have to start making it and that would really kill the profitable SCSI marked by bringing prices down to ATAish levels, and that would be bad for all of us."
I even see SATA proclaimed to be to the harddisks what the switch is over the hub. Individual bandwidth instead of shared bandwidth.
If there is a quality and reliability difference, it has nothing to do with SCSI vs. IDE, but only with the quality expectations and price premium of SCSI.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
thought not
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
Think of all the pr0n you could fit on that...
The accounts I've heard from the elders about Betamax are something I don't want to have to experience first hand. This drive appears to solve the problem by reading most of the formats, and writing most of them too. I desperately need a new CD-ROM, and would like a way of recording as well, but my trepidation at being locked into early technology is large.
This article mentioned that even some versions of the PS2 had differences. I despise this sort of thing. I have a feeling that with the right sort of hardware, most of these problems could be fixed in firmware. Some company needs to put out a drive that has the hardware to do everything, release the specs, and watch as the firmware to read/write all standards roll in.
As an aside, how and CD-R[W] and DVD[+/-]R[W/AM/OM] accomplished in Linux? Would it be by creating a file of the proper size, hooking a loopback device up to it, and treating it as the proper file system, then writing that to the disk? What if I don't have a partition on my disk big enough to handle the temp file?
I have CDR discs I burned seven years ago on my old 1x CDR drive that are still fine today. In fact, I've never had a disc go bad, out of several hundred I've burned since then.
What a crap DVD writer. A much faster and probably much less expensive version is the HP DVD writer.= 40&threadid=894687&highlight_key=y&keyword1=dv d
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid
How close are we to seeing a definitive end to the media standards questions between -R/RW and +R/RW?
This has been debated between friends of mine and we can't get a clear signal as to what might win out. With many drive prices still over $300 its kind of tough to commit to a standard that won't benefit from continuously declining media prices and market acceptance, particularly when it comes to digital media (set-top DVD).
Am I the only one to live in a country where DVD are taxed, and the tax is given to labels ?
I don't know about you, but here (France), tax is as high as 4 euros per support. That means that no matter what technology advance happens, price of clear DVDs will always be high. Suppose I fail one burn on 10, it means that burning 40 Go costs 40 euros, just for taxes !
In short, HDD are actually less expensive by Go than *the TAX* on DVD. Add to this that you still have to pay for the support, it means that burning DVDs will always be way more expensive than buying another HDD.
Since there is no hope that burning DVD will be economicaly interesting, I won't buy a DVD burner. I prefer buying another HDD. It's more convenient, and way less expensive.
Note that there's even more.
For a maxed out IDE chain SCSI is the only way to go. Yeah! One can extend their IDE with an add-on card, but isn't that one of the things IDE people site as the disadvantage of SCSI(you have to buy a SCSI card)? Second for people who are pushing their systems (especially the HD array) doing say video work. If you need to burn something without causing a hickup then you can. A hundred onto the price tag really isn't that great a burden when you consider what you get back. And if you shop around you can get the SCSI cards reasonable.
I just got the Sony DRU500A yesterday. For those looking for one CompUSA actually had them in stock when NO ONE else did. Dell screwed me on my order for one pushing it back until Nov. 29th...so I gave in and went to Comp and got it for $349.
It's a great drive. Does DVD-R/RW, DVD+R/RW, and CD-R/RW. No more worrying about DVD standards. So far I've only got to test it at 1x since that's the media I have, but it worked just fine.
My only complaint is the the front of the tray is Sony silver, while the rest of the drive is white. Might look OK in an aluminum case, though.
Plus, I want an aluminum faceplate. I've worked with aluminum. It ain't that hard or expansive to stamp out an aluminum face.
:)
The friggen drives are detracting from the seximess of my Lian-Li case.
Expensive, not expansive. :)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Not cool. The drive doesn't support Mt. Rainer. It may cost a lot of usuable space on the disk, but the Mt. Rainer extensions have been quite convenient for me on cd drives. Hopefully I'll be able to get a DVD writer which implements them soon...
CONCLUSION
Pros
Supports writing 99min CDs
4 Speed DVD-R Support
2 Speed DVD-RW Support
Supports DAO-RAW mode
Higher DVD read speeds for DVD-ROM & HS media
Lower access times
Can read and write 96 bytes sub-channels
Fast & perfect audio ripping
Can produce X-Box & Playstation compatible disks
Can read & write CD-Text
DVD "-" offers better compatibility with older players
Low cost of ownership
Cons
Has problems reading 99min CDRs (can write them OK)
CD-RW write support is only 8x speed
Slow x2 speed CSS ripping (1.8x)
Still No C2 error read mode
Can not write Safedisk 2.51+ (incorrect EFM encoder)
Slow reading Safedisk CDs
Very poor CD-R read performance
Poor quality media
No defect management for DVD-RWs
Pioneer has finally delivered on what we and most others wanted most in a DVD writer and that was an increase in DVD recording speeds. There is no disputing that the speed at which new DVD writers record to DVD-Rs at is light years ahead of the 1st generation drives - the A05 only needs 15mins to writes a whole 4.7GB of data.
We were slightly disappointed with the A05's CD writing ability, mainly its CD-R maximum writing speed of 16 X and its relatively slow re-write speed. It's interesting to note that the preliminary product specifications show that Pioneer had faster CD recordable features and higher DVD-ROM read speeds in mind but decided against implementing them.
We were pleased that Pioneer added support for writing in DAO-RAW mode - a useful feature used by Clone-CD for backing up games (in countries that permit it). This addition isn't all that it appears to be as its performance was so bad that it's pretty ineffective - it failed to backup any of our games and took long time to read them!
The A04 was particularly good at reading and writing 99min CD-Rs and was one of the best performers for that specific test - the DVR A05 does not follow its lead unfortunately. It can write to 99mins fine but when it came to reading what it had written it had severe problems (this was verified with disks that the A04 had produced).
One of the major improvements that we noticed with this drive was its random access times for DVDs - they are so much faster than the A04 and you wont be disappointed if you'r used to handling many small files.
The 4X DVD recording is an incredibly nice feature to have but unfortunately we didn't get to test it as 4 speed DVD-R and 2 speed DVD-RW disks are not out here in the UK and this is a PRE-RELEASE unit we have reviewed, but we hope to re-test the DVR-A05 with a full retail version if/when the opportunity arises.
The drive had major problems when reading CDs, whether it was a CD-ROM or CD-R it was incredibly fussy and slow. The access times for CDs was good but the transfer rate was slow for everyday use. This is an area where even the older A04 is better at.
With a price tag of £249.00 we feel that Pioneer may have been beaten at its own game by the likes of Sony, Philips, Panasonic and Sanyo who are all due to release 4 speed DVD writers (Sony have already released the DRU-500A in America) with faster recording speeds and more features. The A05 has its work cut out and our advice is wait and see what the competition offers.
Looks a good drive, any idea on the price?
I thought this was a marketing gimmick until I forgot to enable DMA on my new 48x burner.
Needless to say, hundreds of buffer-empty conditions and the CD still wasn't a coaster.
I'm a former SCSI afficionado - I now have a pure IDE system. (I eventually will plug in my 6-disc SCSI changer that I got at a garage sale for $10, but other than that my system is now SCSI free.)
SCSI cabling is far more sensitive to problems/glitches than IDE, so often I would spend an hour trying to get my SCSI chain working after moving the system. Eventually something was going wrong in the SCSI bus that was randomly corrupting data that I couldn't track down. I bought an 80 gig Maxtor (Apparently they've shaped up a LOT in the past few years from all I've heard) and have only once looked back. (For some reason IDE drives suck for ripping CD audio.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
The HP DVD recorders suffer from serious compatibility problems.
Who cares if it burns faster if you're burning what are essentially coasters?
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
The funny part of the story, of course, is that your friend used AOL.
Hmmm, this site is an obvious proponent of the DVD+ formats, since they make a point of calling the DVD- formats "DVD minus", rather than the correct "DVD dash".
Also, who cares about the speed of CD-R/RW burns on a DVD burner? If my major interest were burning CD-R/RW, I wouldn't be buying a DVD burner.
Frankly, everyone I know who has a DVD burner also has a CD burner.
* As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
I think so too! What a stupid person you are.
Why is this so tremenduously important that it made it to the first page?
> IDE disks don't have any intelligence built in to speak of, which is why they're cheaper than SCSI.
That's not why, typical marketing greed is. A 180GB disk has a price delta about $800 (4 $200 PCs from Wal-Mart). $800 is remarkably more "intelligence" than a disk drive would ever, ever, need.
SCSI gained maximal acceptance in "business" environments. That market has an odd sense where overpriced computer parts are better -- by definition. Business, en mass, seems willing to keep playing that game so the drive manufacture's continue to exploit the situation. SCSIness is profitable on its own for about $25 a drive over a comparable IDE version.
Sadly, that will be the death of SCSI. As you say, the performance differences between the two are marginal for most purposes. By extracting maximal rents for SCSI, people keep finding cheap ways to narrow the IDE/SCSI gap.
SCSI's owners obviously feel maximal pricing is the road to maximal profit. Maybe they're right, but like the Tortoise and the Hare, it has never worked out that way in computers.
Sonys DRU-500A (sorry, can't find a link on Sonys site) supports 32x CD and 8x DVD reading speed and 10x CD, 2x DVD-RW, 2.4x DVD+RW rewrite speeds and 24x CD, 4x DVD-R and 2.4x DVD+R writing speeds.
Yea, but a 180G SCSI disk runs $1025 while the IDE version runs $288.
I can buy a 4 way IDE raid unit from Promise (UltraTrak RM4000) for $280, then use 4 raided IDE disks over a single SCSI-160 channel.
So, for about the same cost as a single SCSI drive I can get 4 drives in a 360GB, redundant 0+1, configuration. An IDE mirror out performs any single SCSI disk, hands down.
So the best way to extend IDE disk in performance situations isn't with an add-on IDE card. If you've outgrown MOBO IDE, it is time to start leveraging SCSI. But, you can do so without foolishly buying SCSI drives.
Thus this practice you mention is now in the past. The Pioneer doesn't need to special case media anymore to support 2X and 4X.
Best and Worst List
It is a summary of the opinion of a data recovery house in which types, brands, and models of HDD's are the best and worst.
The Worst list is pretty out of date, but the general comments seem to be accurate.
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
They also play in every player I've tried (granted, I've only tried 5).
"Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
No matter what the speed is, I'm too lazy to put discs in the drive. That's why I buy harddrives.
Does one drive pr. channel mean anything to you? If I put four Serial ATA drives in a box and raid 0 them, I got a theoretical 4x150 = 600MB/s transfer rate. Yes I know it's *theoretical* but it sure scales better than SCSI. 1 SCSI drive, four SCSI drives, ten SCSI drive = still sharing the same bandwidth. Which is why SCSI is dying (not dead) and SerialATA coming (but not quite here, unfortunately).
Oh, and you better read up on that part about ATA having no intelligence, you'd better read up on SerialATA. Re-ordering, no polling, fixed DMA engine problems, pretty much all it needs for being alone on the channel. No need for all that fancy bus locking/ordering features SCSI has.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
You might want to check out the preview benchmarks at lostcircuits. They wonder if the 150MB/s burst rate overfilled the 133MB/s PCI bus, making that the bottleneck for burst speed...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Pioneer sells a DVD changer for just over $1000. This holds 301 DVDs. They sell a CD changer for just over $200. This holds 301 CDs. The difference is just software, and the laser, really. How the frick do they justify this difference?
;)
Capitolism outta control. Gotta love it.
Anyone know of a sub-$300 DVD changer of 300+ disks? (one that can be made region free, macrovision free, and converts PAL/NTSC is prefered, of course
Does that mean Apple will call it the Ultradrive?!
My slot loader reads mini cds and mini dvds just fine. It's the odd shaped out of speck discs that don't wok right.
That because there's a coupla arms in the thing that center the disc on the motor. So if the disc is not a circle, sometimes there's trouble. I really like my slot loader on my laptop 'cause there's no drawer that's always in the way.
I swear the IDE trolls are as bad as the X trolls.
Claming advantages of something that's not here is like MS claiming Word 2006 is the best word processor ever...in 2002!
1-Serial ATA isn't here yet.
2-Because it's not here, it hasn't undergone real-world testing. Or do you always believe what's on the box?
3-SCSI is not standing still waiting for SATA to catch up.
http://www.serialattachedscsi.com/
4-A lot of those features your toting are in the software not the hardware.
5-Because SCSI is here and now one can get most of the advantages at a lower cost than when SATA comes out.
6-SCSI is something that works for external devices (regular or firewire(2)) as well as internal.
7-SATA can't daisy-chain.
IDE disks are made cheap. And this for a reason. Because people like you care about getting storage space and that's it. In fact, ask Joe Sixpack and he'll think that he has 40GB memory...
Bigger is better right? Seriously, how much disk do you need to run an OS and the software you need, perhaps with the addition of a few games? Not hundreds of gigs, that's for sure.
All you're doing is swapping performance for size and thus comparing apples to oranges. SCSI is more scalable and better performing.
That Promise controller, would you put that in a server that you'd bet your job on? Hence, this is for your home use or very light office use. Not for something critical.
I work for Pioneer, and when I saw this I was like, WE DONT EVEN HAVE IT!? HOW DID THEY REVIEW IT!
But I Found out that its due in here next week, I guess we (Japan Corp) sent it out to some manufacturers first, and they somehow got ahold of one.
As far as pricing goes, I have been told that dealer pricing is supposed to be the same as the A04, so whether or not the dealers will mark it up more or not is up to them, take it as you will. Im gonna get mine next week.
BTW 4x Burning Doesnt even matter when you don't have 4x media,
moo.
4x standard was approved by DVD-R consortium (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 21, @01:12PM (#4496830)
Thus this practice you mention is now in the past. The Pioneer doesn't need to special case media anymore to support 2X and 4X.
Well it is dated 6-19-2002
These little tidbit.
"There is one more very important item I need to mention to you all. Very recently, an IBM engineer let slip, a white paper on one of their drives that actually told the truth about how long an IDE drive should last and under what conditions. In this paper, it said that current IDE drives are really only designed to be in operation from 6-8 hours per day! I have always known this to be true! IBM very quickly changed the white paper, and also stated that they stand behind their drives whether it is on for 8 hours or 24 hours per day. Do you want to take the chance? Most if not all of the current large capacity IDE drives, no matter who makes it, are not meant to be left on 24 hours a day. I am sure that none of you reading this are aware of that and may be quite shocked to hear this. These drives should not be put into servers, or be assigned any other industrial use duty! But, you might ask, "What am I supposed to use for heavy duty business use?". The answer is, use what we have used for years in server applications and that is SCSI! SCSI drives are meant to run and run and run without a hiccup. They are made much better than IDE, using better liquid-cooled motors, better parts, and usually better everything! So, the next time you are deciding what to use in a server that you are building, think twice about it. These days, IDE drives are consumer drives at best, and should be used for no other reason. If this list helps one person avoid troubles, I am happy I made it for you."
Now I guess RAID will have to be more common on consumer desktops. Not for performance, but as cheap (relatively speaking) insurance from losing all your data. The above also goes toward explaining why the warrenties were shortened.
Use SCSI if you value your data.
It can also toast four regular bagels or eight slices of Wonder bread. No extra charge.
--
DVDs don't need to spin faster -- you've got more data on the same amount of space, which means it's easier to access it in a shorter amount of time, which means it doesn't need to spin as fast. Get it?
[insert witty comment here]
What part of RAID 0 don't you understand? IDE Made cheap? Then, buy 2, or 4. Toss away as needed. Anyway IDE drives aren't, in fact, made cheap enough it seems as they carry warranties just like the SCSI ones. Made on the same assembly lines, use the same platers, servos, etc. etc.
> SCSI is more scalable and better performing.
It ain't so no more, not if you're building your systems with appropriate tools -- like said raid cards.
It's amazing what you can do when you insert a layer of electronics into the chain. Hum, just like when they drop a SCSI servo board on the bottom of HDA.
> would you put that in a server that you'd bet your job on?
Without a doubt.
SCSI only uses 1 IRQ for all the devices connected to the chain (on non APCI setups) Those stinkin IDE drives use 1 IRQ per device, which sucks if you're trying to make a semi decent system with old hardware.
Interesting. This drive has been posted over at ESBuy.com for almost 4 weeks. They are doing presale with shipping anticipated the first week of November.
http://www.esbuy.com/pion4xdvdrec.html