Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Slightly OT: Hard Drive Speed

This paradigm is not considering performances at all and other limitations
slowering IDE protocol versus SCSI protocols (SCSI has got many
implementations ... and some of them can reach REAL 160MB/sec SUSTAINED
...... no IDE would even approach this at the today technology ...).

Please, all together .... we should try to think open minded and avoiding
paradigms .... the Swiss clock makers have been killed by the market swift
just because they were thinking the mechanical engines were ALWAYS more
precise and desired by customers .... and the reality of the market was not
any more like they were thinking it was .... the result is SEIKO and others
... till SWATCH = Swiss maker of electronic watches with high profitability
and mass sales.

Look to the market .... CD writers are IDE even in the high end part of the
market ... disks are SCSI but in the small/cheap/slow desktop systems not
even in the workstations niche .... even the laptops like the IBM Thinkpads
are using SCSI disk drives ... price/performances ratio is often seeing SCSI
prevailing over IDE .

Anyway ... don't you think this debate (and it is the third in 12 months
!!!!!!!! on the same matter) it's a little bit sliding on the IDEOLIGICAL
side of our thoughts ? ... it seems like the SCSI supporters are blaspheme
or dumb ... and the other party the reedemers ...
My attempt when assempbling a system is to have the best price/performance
and the best scalability .... seen that 3 years ago I only needed 8GB disks
... but today I have 90GB (4 disks) 75% full and always busy .
So for the memory ... today 256MB ... tomorrow 1GB (next system ... under
construction) and so on ...



www.lucenti.com  e-photography site

ICQ: 139507382
----- Original Message -----
From: <derek_c@cix.co.uk>
To: <ezio.lucenti1@tin.it>
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 1:32 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Slightly OT: Hard Drive Speed

Given the same amount of money, why should you deliberately buy 4-5 times
less storage just to satisfy someone's idea of an accurate comparison?

SCSI and IDE are only comparably priced in a very carefully selected subset
of the market.

The rest of the time you gain a lot more storage by getting IDE drives.

On Thursday 07 Feb 2002 2:32 am, Austin Franklin wrote:
> > >> Please name the two drives you are claiming are a FIVE times price
> >
> > increase
> > for SCSI vs IDE.<<
> >
> > I looked up wholesale pricing for the IBM 18gb SCSI drive being
> > discussed, vs a 7200 rpm 100gb IDE drive for the same price and posted
> > the
> > results in a
> > previous message. The SCSI drive costs more than 5x per gb than
> > the IDE. My
> > source was Tech Data, one of the largest computer distributors in
> Come on Moreno, that's a silly comparison.  I've shown an apples for
> comparison that SCSI and IDE are comparably priced.
> Austin

Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body

Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.