Q-bus to CF [was: IOmega]
mcguire at neurotica.com
Fri Feb 29 09:17:40 CST 2008
On Feb 28, 2008, at 12:19 AM, tiggerlasv at aim.com wrote:
> I stopped holding my breath for creation of a Q-Bus IDE
> controller a long time ago. While I like to think that I
> do a reasonable job troubleshooting some problems,
> I'm definitely not a hardware/software engineer.
It has been done. Chuck Dickman did one, I think. It's actually
really easy...device drivers are the hard part.
> It would have been nice, but it makes more sense
> these days to go Q-Bus to SATA. I would imagine
> that it would be alot less hassle, and certainly alot less
> real estate on the board, with the smaller connectors,
> and fewer traces.
Ohhh noonono. The only similarity between ATA and SATA is three
letters in the acronym. SATA is a very intelligent, very complex,
and VERY VERY FAST connection. That's so far beyond "impractical"
that I don't even want to think about it.
> If you can do Q-bus to Compact Flash, then you can do
> Q-bus to IDE, because CF *is* an IDE interface.
> Those wonderful CF to IDE adapter boards generally don't
> have any circuitry on-board, except to drive status LED's.
Well, not exactly, but CF is *mostly* IDE (ATA). For nearly all
applications, they are interchangeable. One difference that comes to
mind is that CF is required to implement 8-bit transfer modes while
ATA is not. This is immaterial in most situations, but I thought it
might be a good idea to mention it.
> I could see no discernable speed increase between
> using real SCSI drives, and the IDE <> CF adapter,
> although I wasn't trying to do any significant benchmarking.
> (The CQD-200's are kind of poky controllers anyway,
> so this didn't really surprise me.)
They are?? I thought they were among the fastest Qbus SCSI
Port Charlotte, FL
More information about the cctech