Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 20:20:03 -0400 From: Drew Derbyshire <ahd@kew.com> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lousy disk perf. under cpu load (was IDE vs SCSI) Message-ID: <341344B3.57D10484@kew.com> References: <199709070512.AAA00465@dyson.iquest.net> <199709070759.JAA08253@sos.freebsd.dk> <19970907143101.34175@keltia.freenix.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ollivier Robert wrote: > I must miss something. There was a time where SCSI was for high-end systems > and IDE for smaller ones. Life was simple. Now they're turning IDE into > SCSI. WHY ? Because you can take an EIDE drive and put it on a system with 1990 vintage IDE controller, and only take a performance hit. Upward compatibility means a lot to any user. > Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: There are no limits -=- roberto@keltia.freenix.fr This reminds me of the "Turning PC into workstations" line at the top of the FreeBSD home page. To beat NT Workstation at it's own game, you have beat on it's own hardware. Do you want to turn the maximum number of systems (embracing the most common PC hard drive and CD-ROM types) into workstations? Or make them _think_ their EIDE hard drive and ATAPI CD-ROM _limits_ them from turning their PC into a FreeBSD Workstation? To me, the entire "SCSI rules" tone some people use reminds of Mac users, and I don't want think most people on this list wish for Bill Gates to want or need to bail out FreeBSD. :-) -ahd- -- Internet: ahd@kew.com Voice: 617-279-9812 "MS-DOS didn't get as bad as it is overnight -- it took over ten years of careful development." - dmeggins@aix1.uottawa.ca
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?341344B3.57D10484>