Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:11:17 -0800 (PST) From: invalid opcode <coredump@nervosa.com> To: Jake Hamby <jehamby@lightside.com> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Go SCSI! Big improvement... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960228140756.20944G-100000@nervosa.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.AUX.3.91.960227095437.19218C-100000@covina.lightside.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 27 Feb 1996, Jake Hamby wrote: > Speaking of marketing, EISA was always positioned as the high-end board > for SERVERS, so both the motherboard and cards were always more > expensive. Only a few high-end desktop machines (e.g. Compaq, which I > wouldn't buy for incompatibility reasons alone), came with EISA as > standard. This continued to be true throughout VLB and PCI. If boards > and cards were AVAILABLE and AFFORDABLE, then I would've bought into EISA > like a shot, but it was always positioned as a "server" solution only.. > ---Jake But see, you notice all the bus designs that actually MAKE SENSE, (whoa what's that new term?), are the ones that are consistent, don't share bus space with other forms, fast, and allow software configurablility of the boards. The only BUS designs I can think of are EISA and NUBUS. == Chris Layne ============================================================== == coredump@nervosa.com ================= http://www.nervosa.com/~coredump ==
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960228140756.20944G-100000>