On 2 October 2017 at 14:22, Jules Richardson via cctech
wrote:
>
> Does anyone know why IDE/ATA even came about? I mean, why SCSI wasn't used?
Sure, yes.
It was cheap.
SCSI was expensive, and that was aside from any licensing issues. A
working SCSI bus effectively means
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Jon Elson via cctech
wrote:
> On 10/02/2017 08:29 AM, allison via cctech wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It was price... ATA-IDE was cheaper and PC industry was working hard to
>> push the price down.
>> SCSI always remained more costly.
>>
>> Yes. I
On 10/2/17 11:34 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctech wrote:
On 10/02/2017 10:03 AM, Alan Perry via cctech wrote:
Here is a complete quote from the minutes:
"Jim McGrath of Quantum defined his company's interest as being
primarily in the ability to embed SCSI into a drive without there being
a
On 10/02/2017 10:03 AM, Alan Perry via cctech wrote:
> Here is a complete quote from the minutes:
> "Jim McGrath of Quantum defined his company's interest as being
> primarily in the ability to embed SCSI into a drive without there being
> a physical SCSI bus present. He described some problems
On 10/2/17 5:22 AM, Jules Richardson via cctech wrote:
On 10/02/2017 01:46 AM, Alan Perry via cctech wrote:
There was a call to form the CAM (Common Access Method) Committee of
X3T9.2
(SCSI-2) on 30 Sept 1988 and they first met on 19 Oct 1988. The primary
goal was to come up with a SCSI
On 10/02/2017 08:29 AM, allison via cctech wrote:
It was price... ATA-IDE was cheaper and PC industry was
working hard to push the price down.
SCSI always remained more costly.
Yes. I think there were royalties to pay for a true SCSI
drive. Anyway, there was a VERY significant price
On 10/2/17 10:13 AM, Jules Richardson via cctech wrote:
On 10/02/2017 08:29 AM, allison via cctech wrote:
On 10/2/17 8:22 AM, Jules Richardson via cctech wrote:
On 10/02/2017 01:46 AM, Alan Perry via cctech wrote:
There was a call to form the CAM (Common Access Method) Committee
of X3T9.2
On 10/02/2017 08:29 AM, allison via cctech wrote:
On 10/2/17 8:22 AM, Jules Richardson via cctech wrote:
On 10/02/2017 01:46 AM, Alan Perry via cctech wrote:
There was a call to form the CAM (Common Access Method) Committee of X3T9.2
(SCSI-2) on 30 Sept 1988 and they first met on 19 Oct
On 10/2/17 9:40 AM, william degnan wrote:
ATA-IDE and SCSI (OK SASI) are about the same age but had
different adoption and growth rates.
Earliest SASI/SCSI was AmproLB+ and Visual 1050 with adaptor. I
have both with hard disks.
FYI the Z80 powered AMPROLB+ was 1984
>
>
> ATA-IDE and SCSI (OK SASI) are about the same age but had different
> adoption and growth rates.
>
> Earliest SASI/SCSI was AmproLB+ and Visual 1050 with adaptor. I have both
> with hard disks.
> FYI the Z80 powered AMPROLB+ was 1984 introduction.
The Commodore D9060/D9090 pre-dates these
On 10/2/17 8:22 AM, Jules Richardson via cctech wrote:
On 10/02/2017 01:46 AM, Alan Perry via cctech wrote:
There was a call to form the CAM (Common Access Method) Committee of
X3T9.2
(SCSI-2) on 30 Sept 1988 and they first met on 19 Oct 1988. The primary
goal was to come up with a SCSI
On 10/1/17 1:22 PM, Fred Cisin via cctech wrote:
On Sun, 1 Oct 2017, Tom Gardner via cctalk wrote:
I've looked for but cannot find any WD or Compaq documents publically
using IDE to describe what ultimately issued as ATA-1. My search
included various Compaq maintenance manuals.
Thank you
12 matches
Mail list logo