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

Re: OT: scsi vs ide: some data

On 28 Feb 2002 23:48:28 -0500
Sean <sean@gutenpress.org> wrote:

>  I don't have any IDE drives to test, but I can offer my main reason on
>  going scsi instead of IDE. I still think that SCSI offers better
>  response performance than IDE, while they are often close on raw data
>  transfer. I've had numerous IDE drives fail after many years of service
>  ... and I have yet to have a scsi drive fail on me. I think scsi
>  hardware is just better hardware, kind of like the difference between a
>  mercedes and a hyundai. Sure, they're both cars that perform the same
>  function, and while one may go a little faster, most people don't need
>  to go that fast in the first place, and there is a huge price
>  differential. But the mercedes will still be running decades later,
>  while the hyundia will most likely be sitting upon the scrap heap.
>  That's probably not a very good analogy, but it's all I could think of
>  at this late hour .... I like the idea of massively large storage for
>  little money, but I don't see myself ever leaving scsi unless something
>  drastic happens to its quality of manufacture.

Let me see. If your IDE drives only fail "after many years of service",
then the disposable solution is simple, buy a new IDE drive when the
time comes. I'm sure some new technology will turn your super-durable
SCSI drive into a relative sluggard. No wait! You're a Greenpeace
activist and land fills just horrify you ;-) But then why buy a Mercedes
or Hyundai, when you can take the train?

Reply to: