Here we go again, the good ole SCSI vs. IDE debate.
A pretty bold claim to make.
Yes, but you mention no point to disprove it.
SCSI is designed for efficiency, and produces less CPU load than IDE for the majority of tasks.
This one ALWAYS comes up and is based on OUTDATED information. Having written drivers for each one for a real-time OS, I can tell you there is no noticable difference, assuming you have only one IDE device per channel. Granted that is maybe a bit limiting for your average PC, but that's why I buy boards with 4 IDE channels instead of 2. If you go beyond that you are starting to talk RAID systems, so the claim is right.
SCSI can disconnect busy devices from the channel, not locking it out from use by other devices, and thus not practically requiring a whole bus for every device you use.
True, but see above.
SCSI command structure is well-documented, consistent, simple to program, and generic enough to support almost any device that is capable of transfering data.
Same goes for IDE. Well documented and simple to program. I've done it.
Maybe not very generic for devices such as scanners etc., but realistically, who gives? That's why we have USB 2.0 and Firewire.
SCSI has had built-in data integrity features for years, which were only recently introduced with Ultra ATA.
So that is not an argument anymore. (quite honestly, Ultra ATA is not 'recent' anymore, we've had it for a while)
Many SCSI devices are hotswappable in the case of a failure.
Who cares unless we are talking a server?
The SCSI hostadapter/target relationship is a more flexible relationship than the IDE interface/device relationship, and can be more useful where unique solutions are required (such as accessing a device from two machines simultaneously).
Yeah I've seen that feature being used exactly zero times. Definitly not at home. This stuff helps nothing with the cost-effectiveness.
SCSI equipment tends to be more expensive, but the difference is that it is not throwaway, consumer-quality equipment. Many people appreciate having this choice.
Most SCSI hardrives are EXACTLY the same as the IDE counter part, the only difference being the electronics. Believe me, that's not what fails. Yes, you can buy high-end SCSI that's not available in IDE but at what price tag? Do I hear 'server' or 'RAID' anywhere?
I agree there should be choice, it's nice. Long live SCSI, but not in my house. Maybe in my server...
And then these comments:
If the extra $100 I pay for a SCSI drive means that I will enjoy never having to replace the drive;
Riiiight. SCSI drives never fail. So why do you need hot swap in the first place? At that price you are talking about those drives that are exactly the same as the IDE counterpart, except for electronics.
never having to deal with a software compatibility hassle;
?? I've had more hassle with software and SCSI devices than with my IDE harddrives.
never having to deal with an interoperability hassle with another device in my loaded system;
There's a point here, but if you stick to the principal of one device per channel, you never have a problem. Oh, and did I mention 'Termination Madness'?
and never having less than the best performance that I expect from the equipment, then that's an extra fee that I will be happy to pay and not look back.
Sure, whatever you want. But the original post was talking cost-effective, and SCSI just isn't anymore, except maybe in heavily loaded server situations.
Gosh, I wonder how come M$ has so many problems with secoority. 1024 bytes on the stack, without overrun checking. Wonderful stuff indeed.
You may say, yeah but how often will you printf more than 1024 bytes? Exactly,- practically never. Which is why this sort of crap is not showing up in testing and DOES show up when people are trying to crack it.
It's just that those are the page-per-minute ratings for blank sheets of paper being pushed through the printer. It doesn't include any actual printing.
Not true. In fact I've been printing snowstorms at the advertised pages per minute for a long time now.
Post 911 babble science to make us all feel warm and fuzzy. I mean, what the fsck?
Sorry but that article is just beyond me. And the robot tried to cheat!! Well yeah if it can turn millions of years of evolution into a three hour process it shouldn't have any problem learning how to cheat.
let's say the extra energy lost requires you to eat an extra hamburger.
Now this hamburger needs to be heated up. In a place where they need to have light. And toilets. And wireless headsets. And lighted billboards that can be electronically updated. But first of all a cow had to be created. And fed. In a place with electric fences. And a sewer system. And grass that had to be mowed by a tractor that had to be created somewhere in Pennsylvania. And then the cow had to be hollered over to the slaughterhouse in a big truck made in Detroit. And the truck would do about a mile to the gallon. And require new tires every 6 months. And the slaughterhouse would have to buy new Magnum 45s every year to shoot the lead bullets in the cow's brain. And all those people that where so busy making your hamburger now also lost energy and could use a hamburger themselves.
The population level oscillates around this level with a logarithmic function, looking somewhat similar to a sine wave, and as time goes to infinity, the oscillations become smaller and closer to the carrying capacity.
This is a fact of nature. It happens with mice, antelope, fish, bacteria, and apes. Why would people think it wouldn't happen to humans?
As opposed to everyone replying to you that think that humans are so bloody unique, I want to point out that you failed to mention one important thing:
This 'sine wave' oscilates between two imaginary high and low limits (consider them horizontal lines parallel to the carrying capacity, where the carrying capacity is the center line). In a normal developing population, it never overshoots, nor undershoots either of those high and low 'thresholds'. From what I understand, a lot of occurances that were studied where a population did either over or undershoot, they became extinct very soon thereafter.
Now I don't know what the data looks like for us, but I have a suspicion that it's not too dandy. Just hope we really are that unique...
Am I the only one who thinks optimizing for C code is silly when you ignore vital symbols like braces, brackets, and numbers even? At least he included the semicolon.
Not to mention the fact that C code is normally not written starting at the first character contiguously to the last character.
I know I move the cursor around a LOT (with the arrow, page up/dn, home, end keys).
A better way may be to do a capture of a person actually typing. The problem is that then you'd have to filter out typos, but I can see that's doable. This would be a far more 'real world' approach. Unless we are the only ones that are frequently using a large set of keys that where not included...
1) Outside, you are pretty much limited to line-of-site. Bodys containing water do a great job of blocking the signal. This includes people, trees, cacti, etc.
Tell me, do they still have those very small, formula-1 look-a-like racers that can't run on a normal street (I think they have neoprene wheels) so you have to build your own tracks?
I wouldn't know for sure, but I'd be surprised if you couldn't find it on eBay. I'm actually more into 1:10 4 wheel drive's, and I was amazed at what you can find on eBay. The oldest kit I bought (not 4WD) is from 1978, and is still unbuilt, in excellent, brand new condition. Pretty cool, if you are into it.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Here we go again, the good ole SCSI vs. IDE debate.
A pretty bold claim to make.
Yes, but you mention no point to disprove it.
SCSI is designed for efficiency, and produces less CPU load than IDE for the majority of tasks.
This one ALWAYS comes up and is based on OUTDATED information. Having written drivers for each one for a real-time OS, I can tell you there is no noticable difference, assuming you have only one IDE device per channel. Granted that is maybe a bit limiting for your average PC, but that's why I buy boards with 4 IDE channels instead of 2. If you go beyond that you are starting to talk RAID systems, so the claim is right.
SCSI can disconnect busy devices from the channel, not locking it out from use by other devices, and thus not practically requiring a whole bus for every device you use.
True, but see above.
SCSI command structure is well-documented, consistent, simple to program, and generic enough to support almost any device that is capable of transfering data.
Same goes for IDE. Well documented and simple to program. I've done it.
Maybe not very generic for devices such as scanners etc., but realistically, who gives? That's why we have USB 2.0 and Firewire.
SCSI has had built-in data integrity features for years, which were only recently introduced with Ultra ATA.
So that is not an argument anymore. (quite honestly, Ultra ATA is not 'recent' anymore, we've had it for a while)
Many SCSI devices are hotswappable in the case of a failure.
Who cares unless we are talking a server?
The SCSI hostadapter/target relationship is a more flexible relationship than the IDE interface/device relationship, and can be more useful where unique solutions are required (such as accessing a device from two machines simultaneously).
Yeah I've seen that feature being used exactly zero times. Definitly not at home. This stuff helps nothing with the cost-effectiveness.
SCSI equipment tends to be more expensive, but the difference is that it is not throwaway, consumer-quality equipment. Many people appreciate having this choice.
Most SCSI hardrives are EXACTLY the same as the IDE counter part, the only difference being the electronics. Believe me, that's not what fails. Yes, you can buy high-end SCSI that's not available in IDE but at what price tag? Do I hear 'server' or 'RAID' anywhere?
I agree there should be choice, it's nice. Long live SCSI, but not in my house. Maybe in my server...
And then these comments:
If the extra $100 I pay for a SCSI drive means that I will enjoy never having to replace the drive;
Riiiight. SCSI drives never fail. So why do you need hot swap in the first place? At that price you are talking about those drives that are exactly the same as the IDE counterpart, except for electronics.
never having to deal with a software compatibility hassle;
?? I've had more hassle with software and SCSI devices than with my IDE harddrives.
never having to deal with an interoperability hassle with another device in my loaded system;
There's a point here, but if you stick to the principal of one device per channel, you never have a problem. Oh, and did I mention 'Termination Madness'?
and never having less than the best performance that I expect from the equipment, then that's an extra fee that I will be happy to pay and not look back.
Sure, whatever you want. But the original post was talking cost-effective, and SCSI just isn't anymore, except maybe in heavily loaded server situations.
Or this Calm PC
Doesn't support the fastest CPU's but it's as silent as silence gets.
I've been running it for a while now and I love it.
Sorry, I know it's sometimes not to straight forward to get to the parent post on /. so I should have included a quote.
h oo d/default.aspx [microsoft.com]
Please note though that I started with OT (Off Topic)...
Basically I replied to a post that said:
Try libctiny:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/01/
You may say, yeah but how often will you printf more than 1024 bytes? Exactly,- practically never. Which is why this sort of crap is not showing up in testing and DOES show up when people are trying to crack it.
It's not very hard to make your sight accessible for the blind
Ouch, baby. Very very ouch.
(hey, I agree with you but this unfortunate spelling mistake is just too funny)
until the year 300647712690. In other words approx. 280 billion years
:-D
:-D
Congratulations, you have just been selected for the ultimate geek award!
Hint: people that don't know about 1024 would have probably said either 300 billion years or 301 billion years.
Use colour, fonts, sounds and whatever else you want
;-)
I know of a nice website you might like. Uses the same paradigm.
In BASIC, you know that A$ is a string
And we all know that Basic is the pinnacle of programming languages.
Don't worry, there's 3 people in Wales, of which two live in LlanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllLlantysilio gogogoch
Just kidding, I've been to this lovely town and all I'm saying is that there's not _that_ many people living in Wales.
It's just that those are the page-per-minute ratings for blank sheets of paper being pushed through the printer. It doesn't include any actual printing.
Not true. In fact I've been printing snowstorms at the advertised pages per minute for a long time now.
if a bunch of blind men are trying to describe an elephant by touch
Oh man, I'm doomed. Reading all these intelligent discussions, and all I can think of is a guy with his arm stuck up and elephant's arse...
You can start with having sex with your dad's second wife.
Post 911 babble science to make us all feel warm and fuzzy. I mean, what the fsck?
Sorry but that article is just beyond me. And the robot tried to cheat!! Well yeah if it can turn millions of years of evolution into a three hour process it shouldn't have any problem learning how to cheat.
From the way that thing is named I would suspect that that doesn't protect against pop-ups loaded from, say, a timer.
www.meaya.com
(I'm not afiliated or anything, it just seems to work 99% of the time)
Yet Another Window Nanager
Sorry, couldn't resist.
let's say the extra energy lost requires you to eat an extra hamburger.
Now this hamburger needs to be heated up. In a place where they need to have light. And toilets. And wireless headsets. And lighted billboards that can be electronically updated. But first of all a cow had to be created. And fed. In a place with electric fences. And a sewer system. And grass that had to be mowed by a tractor that had to be created somewhere in Pennsylvania. And then the cow had to be hollered over to the slaughterhouse in a big truck made in Detroit. And the truck would do about a mile to the gallon. And require new tires every 6 months. And the slaughterhouse would have to buy new Magnum 45s every year to shoot the lead bullets in the cow's brain. And all those people that where so busy making your hamburger now also lost energy and could use a hamburger themselves.
And you call THIS good for the environment?!
The population level oscillates around this level with a logarithmic function, looking somewhat similar to a sine wave, and as time goes to infinity, the oscillations become smaller and closer to the carrying capacity.
This is a fact of nature. It happens with mice, antelope, fish, bacteria, and apes. Why would people think it wouldn't happen to humans?
As opposed to everyone replying to you that think that humans are so bloody unique, I want to point out that you failed to mention one important thing:
This 'sine wave' oscilates between two imaginary high and low limits (consider them horizontal lines parallel to the carrying capacity, where the carrying capacity is the center line). In a normal developing population, it never overshoots, nor undershoots either of those high and low 'thresholds'. From what I understand, a lot of occurances that were studied where a population did either over or undershoot, they became extinct very soon thereafter.
Now I don't know what the data looks like for us, but I have a suspicion that it's not too dandy. Just hope we really are that unique...
Am I the only one who thinks optimizing for C code is silly when you ignore vital symbols like braces, brackets, and numbers even? At least he included the semicolon.
Not to mention the fact that C code is normally not written starting at the first character contiguously to the last character.
I know I move the cursor around a LOT (with the arrow, page up/dn, home, end keys).
A better way may be to do a capture of a person actually typing. The problem is that then you'd have to filter out typos, but I can see that's doable. This would be a far more 'real world' approach. Unless we are the only ones that are frequently using a large set of keys that where not included...
So I can reach into my pocket and push a button, and every cell phone within 10 meters stops working for 30 seconds
;)
Yeah, and with that much power radiated from your pocket you should grow that third ball real fast.
Satisfying indeed.
"What's the difference between a bridge and a switch?"--I'm usually merciful and stop them if they start talking layer 3
I agree. It's when the start talking cars and lights turning on and off that you want to pay attention.
(sorry,- I'm in my Friday mood...;-))
Writing code (not typing it) is *hard*
I know, I haven't lifted a pencil in years.
I thought writing (by hand) was officially declared obsolete.
After hearing about the 500kph Maglev in Japan on Slashdot, I caught wind of this installation which is going up in Norfolk, Virginia
Yeah and at 40 MPH, America is _almost_ there!
1) Outside, you are pretty much limited to line-of-site. Bodys containing water do a great job of blocking the signal. This includes people, trees, cacti, etc.
Oh no! Not cacti! What am I going to do?
- Steve in Montreal.
Tell me, do they still have those very small, formula-1 look-a-like racers that can't run on a normal street (I think they have neoprene wheels) so you have to build your own tracks?
;)
I wouldn't know for sure, but I'd be surprised if you couldn't find it on eBay. I'm actually more into 1:10 4 wheel drive's, and I was amazed at what you can find on eBay. The oldest kit I bought (not 4WD) is from 1978, and is still unbuilt, in excellent, brand new condition. Pretty cool, if you are into it.