?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Computer Shite. . .

In the process of trying to re-do my whole computer setup, while avoiding having to do a whole flatline and re-install.

Not having much luck as of yet. Getting odd Errors from my Quantum Atlas 10K2 SCSI Drive, so I decided to low level forat it wit the SCSI Bios. Note to self a 70GB Drive takes a LONG ASS TIME to low level format and there is no indicator of what point the process is at.

Maybe I'll go to bed and see if it's done by the morning. .

Although this program on the History Channel on Declassified: Radical Movements which covers everything from the KKK, to the Anarchists, to the Whether Underground. . . it's pretty interesting. . .

Rev

Tags:

Comments

( 7 comments — Leave a comment )
delchi
Feb. 24th, 2006 10:26 am (UTC)
check out that CD I gave you " the black fflower bus leaves at dawn " ... more good stuff.
xterminal
Feb. 24th, 2006 01:50 pm (UTC)
Damn... you still have a SCSI drive...

I bow before your superior geekiness.

(But I get my external USB drive tonight! [crosses fingers] Three hundred gigs of shared slsk goodness... and I have the archives to, basically, fill it as soon as it's up and running... my winamp playlist will NEVER repeat...)
ex_tapeworm317
Feb. 24th, 2006 03:53 pm (UTC)
Bah. SATA muthafucka!
xterminal
Feb. 24th, 2006 04:28 pm (UTC)
Pfft. My 160 is SATA. It ain't even close to obsolete.

SCSI is the Betamax of pass-through technology. It was good-- damned good, better than ATA and its derivatives-- but the tech was always too expensive, so it never really caught on. (I mean, look at the original ads for SATA-- the whole idea was to come up with an ATA derivative that was as fast as SCSI.)

We were doing some sort of proprietary thing at ATV back in the mid-nineties that blew SCSI out of the water, but it never went any farther than our boxes. Bloody hell if I remember what it was called, though.
razorslave
Feb. 24th, 2006 05:46 pm (UTC)
Heh

My b0Xen is teh g33k core. . .

I've had my SCSI since 1998/99 deprivation educated me in the wonders of SCSI and hard disc recording in Windows 95/OSR2 and 98SE. The First "Scary Frankencomputor" I built was a Dual P3-500 with 256MB of RAM.

SCSI with it READ WRITE READ WRITE routine was the only option when running Sound Forge Acid and making a track using 124MB of Samples being streamed from one disc, and being written to another section on the same disc.

IDE with it's READ STOP WRITE routine when writing to devices on the same chain would totally choked on that.

SATA does apear to be the way to go. I havnt done enough research to be able to lay out the diffrencese Between SATA and SCSI and why they're better at what they do, but it boils down to SCSI still kicks SATA's ass for DB and Server applications but SATA owns SCSI for single user applications.

Rev
irishmasms
Feb. 25th, 2006 01:59 am (UTC)
so it never really caught on
Ahem: older Mac systems. server & drive array setups. Oh, yea they dont use SCSI.....

xterminal
Feb. 25th, 2006 02:06 am (UTC)
Re: so it never really caught on
the key word there being "older." And IDE was always an option on Macs, no?

Lot of people used Betamax, too.
( 7 comments — Leave a comment )