Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 17:21:03 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: dochawk@psu.edu, Linh Pham <lplist@closedsrc.org> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: which is faster zip drive under FreeBSD: usb or parallel? Message-ID: <15161.2767.189737.37895@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <131699446@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
dochawk@psu.edu types: > > > Yes, i do get irritated with that. But, for my laptop it seems the only > > > practical way to go for backups and archives. It's not too bad. When i > > get > > > a desktop, if i ever do, i will definitely go with tape and cron. > I"m actually going with extra ide drives for backup on my scsi system. > The price of 40G drives is down to about 1.5X the same amount of > tapemedia, and then there's the tape drive. I'll have a 3 IDE RAID 5 > rather than a tape drive. I'll also have the scsi cd/rw . . . I tried that for a while. Then I needed the IRQs back :-(. Linh Pham <lplist@closedsrc.org> types: > Now I have gotten rid of all of my Parallel equipment and moved to SCSI > (for drives and scanners) and USB for other stuff. Why not USB for the scanner? While the Iomega SCSI may suck, my Artec SCSI scanner creates far more problems. I solved them by putting the scanner, the IOMega and the CDRW on their own bus, but that seems excessive. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15161.2767.189737.37895>