Upgrading early BIOS

Chuck Guzis cclist at sydex.com
Thu Aug 14 13:08:23 CDT 2008

On 14 Aug 2008 at 12:36, Jules Richardson wrote:

> Funny how SCSI seemed to get a bad name for that kind of thing, yet
> IDE's reputation stood intact despite all the inconsistencies. 

One of the answers that I wanted to convey to the OP was "If you want 
to (fairly) painlessly increase hard disk storage on an older system, 
get a SCSI controller and drive."  But ISA SCSI controllers are 
getting harder to find, so that's probably a no-go.

IDE is cheap in comparison to SCSI, so that was probably one very 
good reason why it found wide adoption.  

If disks were bad, tapes were far worse.  There was all manner of 
mutually-incompatible cheap tape backup out there.  We insisted as 
SCSI being the only tape interface that we would support--there was 
an ANSI-defined common command set and most of the later units were 
read-after-write verification.  I wonder how many of those old DC2000 
carts written on floppytape drives are still readable?  And who can 
still read their Datasonix Pereos tapes? (I've got some Irwin-
recorded DC1000s that I really should check for readability one of 
these days).

For us, 4mm DAT was most popular based on media cost, followed 
closely by Exabyte 8mm.  DLT was third, mostly because of very high 
media cost.  Bernoulli and other removable media drives were also 
very popular.


More information about the cctech mailing list