How come scsi never really took over?

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: randalee

Originally posted by: Crusty
In fact, in this machine i've got 4x18gb drives... 1 is 15k and the other three are 10k rpms.

HHEEEEEEYYYYYYLLLLOOOOO???? CAAAAANNNNN YOOOOUUU HEEEEEEEEAAARRRRR MEEEEEEE OVVVVVER THEERRRRE BY YOUR COMMMPUTER?

I have two 10K SCSI drives. I can't hear them at all over the stock Athlon 64 fan.

 

[sandorski]

Cost and complexity of setup.

 

[Rubycon]

LOL at those making remarks about the loudness or lack of. Kind of obvious who has actually used SCSI drives and who hasn't? hmmm

 

[randalee]

Originally posted by: C6FT7
LOL at those making remarks about the loudness or lack of. Kind of obvious who has actually used SCSI drives and who hasn't? hmmm

Yup. I have heard 'em both ways -- but MOST ARE SCREAMERS.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: C6FT7
LOL at those making remarks about the loudness or lack of. Kind of obvious who has actually used SCSI drives and who hasn't? hmmm

i got four in the system i'm posting from right now. definitely louder than IDE or SATA drives.

 

[geno]

teh moneyz!!!!

 

[Vegito]

4 73gb 15k
6 73gb 10k
7 146gb 10k

housed in a lian li v2000 case

sounds like a jet taking off... but lots of protected storage...

 

[LuNoTiCK]

Originally posted by: Vegito
4 73gb 15k
6 73gb 10k
7 146gb 10k

housed in a lian li v2000 case

sounds like a jet taking off... but lots of protected storage...

Must be some precious porn.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
People have already stated pretty much all of the reasons, but I'm gonna go over them again. SCSI is expensive, loud, pain to set up (lots more jumpers then IDE), and basicly designed for server use. IDE is cheaper, quieter, and basicly designd for home desktop use.

Jumpers? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot...

Even the basic HP DL360-380 servers do not use any kind of jumpers...you can pop in hot swapable SCSI drives and configure them directly from a browser-based GUI.

SCSI is easy, really. Just the price factor makes it the stupid choice for single user type systems...once you get past 10 or so users on a single server...SCSI's added performance becomes an advantage.

Hes likely thinking of Scsi II which I have and I have to say, it had a LOT of jumpers. Imagine learning how to setup scsi on your own for the first time with out any manuals nor specification guides on the HDD to tell you what jumper does what!
<------
I ended up compiling a sheet with data on what each jumper did for each SCSI II drive I had (about 4 I guess) and if you guys care, I could scan it in. It took many many hours to figure this out, just made it so much worse because back then, I had never configured SCSI by my self nor ever setup an array.

 

[SagaLore]

SATA is NOT inferior. In many ways, it is actually superior.

 

[Steve]

Originally posted by: SagaLore
SATA is NOT inferior. In many ways, it is actually superior.

Elaborate?

 

[Ronstang]

You know, I have 6 brand new Quattum 9 gigabyte SCSI drives in the closet and a 2 drive and 4 drive external SCSI enclosures in the attic with the cables.....I just can't get motivated to put effort into 36G of storage for the amount of power they would consume. I need to find them a new home.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Actually, i'd have to say most of the *new* lower end servers being deployed at DCs are SATA drives.

 

[Zap]

Why did IDE (and USB and SATA) become "standard" for the desktop? Intel choose to integrate it into the motherboard chipset, I think way back with the i440FX. All discussions about merit, quality, performance and other stuff aside, when Intel backs something, 90% of the time it becomes "the" standard (10% of the time accounts for RAMBUS isgust.

"Typical" SCSI does have benefits, such as lower access times and capability for more drives, however IDE standards have done a good job in keeping up with controller transfer rates and current drives have reasonable STR compared to SCSI - and of course the price/performance/capacity of EIDE can't be beat.

Perhaps it really isn't the interface that makes SCSI, more that it is the class of device. Up next? SAS, which is somewhat compatible with SATA. Once they use the same interface, what's superior about SCSI? The "class of device" meaning longer warranties, rated for sustained 24/7 duty cycles, lower latencies, capable of more drives... that's what it's been all along.

 

[Vegito]

Originally posted by: LuNoTiCK

Must be some precious porn.

yes, im a big star...