Date   : Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:40:17 +0000
From   : Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk@...>
Subject: Re: SASI/SCSI <>IDE, distracting thoughts.

Jonathan Graham Harston wrote:
>> Message-ID: <44144C1C.3080500@...>
>  
> Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk@...> wrote:
>> Personally I'd much rather someone with the necessary knowledge invest time
> in
>> getting "modern" (as in 512 byte sectored, parity) SCSI drives (and
>> documenting the process) working with old Acorn hardware than futzing around
>> with 'orrible IDE stuff!
>  
> How is IDE 'orrible?

Reliabilty and performance under load - I wasn't meaning programming.

Long time since I wrote an IDE driver, but I remember it being pretty easy - 
but then, SCSI is pretty easy on old equipment, and even these days I suppose 
it's as complex as you want to make it (it's the host bus adapters that have 
become fiendishly complicated)

Remember that the SCSI<->ST506 bridge board manuals even tend to give you 
driver code at the back :-)

>> Can't see the difference between building an IDE buffer / control board and
> a
>> SCSI one, myself. Surely they'll be the same level of complexity really?
>  
> IDE interface: two ICs minimum.
>  
> SCSI interface: six ICs minimum and lots of bus spaghetti.

Hmm, I suppose I don't see a lot of difference in that given that it's just 
TTL - if it was 2 chips versus 20 it'd be a different matter!