At 05:07 PM 7/13/2000 -0400, you wrote: >How many drivers do you think that you can fit on a single disk? Think >about it, many of these flash solutions require that they be attached to a >IDE interface. Not all IDE chipsets are the same, or take the same >parameters, and unfortunately many of them are buggy, requiring workarounds. >Hence, different drivers. If you can, look at the Linux kernel compilation >menu (Yes, I *KNOW* that GB doesn't run on linux, but follow me), there are >such workarounds/drivers for MANY controllers in the IDE section.
That's a very valid point - however, it doesn't need to fit on the disk, you'd be booting from the flash. At the very core, it's based on FreeBSD. We all know FreeBSD supports a wide variety of IDE controllers, even PicoBSD (bootable FreeBSD from single floppy) supports mounting IDE devices. And even if they only support a single IDE chipset, I can think of at least a dozen folks that'd go out a buy a board with that chipset just to get away from the floppy. >You would imply that they are doing it to screw us over. I think it's being >done for purely technical reasons. Quite possible, and I'm not doubting that. The fact that they're releasing new features onto GB-100 and not the floppy version (yes, I know -- no room on the disk) makes me a bit suspicious, though. Since their argument is that there's no room, how about another solution for us floppy users? Flash/LS-120/etc support? Sorry, I don't mean to drag on the same old argument, hopefully GTA understands their users' concerns by now. If they don't, I think we're going to see a majority of their current users really question the company's direction.
