F
Folkert Rienstra
J.Clarke said:
Which is a pure software matter (driver), not hardware.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Which is a pure software matter (driver), not hardware.
M
Marc de Vries
Yeah, that sort of deliberate short stroking has been
around for quite a while now from some manufacturers.
While I can see that thats likely why they do it, to
stop people deliberately killing their drives to get a
bigger replacement, I think it would be a better policy
to not short stroke the drive as a sort of bonus for
those who have been ****ed around by a drive failure.
Yeah.
Luckily it was just my system disk and I had moved most data to some
new disks on a raid5 controller I bought the week before.
But it still costs a lot of time.
They dont cross ship the replacement.
Thats much more convenient for the user who
isnt then without a drive for any time at all, and
if the drive isnt completely dead they may be
able to copy stuff from the original drive too.
Their policy is that they don't do that.
And can use the shipping container the replacement
showed up in to send the failed drive back in.
Luckily, in Europe, they don't make such a fuss about the shipping
container as in the US.
I would certainly want cross shipment there too.
But the competition doesn't cross ship here either. But that might be
different in the US too?
Fraid not. They can be surprisingly
slow to send out the replacement too.
Took about a week before I had the replacement. That's about the same
as I heard from other companies.
Luckily I had a spare drive lying around, so it didn't really bother
me much.
Its only the OWNERSHIP that changed. The same monkeys
are largely involved in the design and manufacture of the drives.
Relax Rod, I know.
That's why I put the smiley there.
Sure, but thats not the problem. The problem was that IBM
kept denying that there ever was a problem with those drives.
Let alone actually fessing up to what the problem actually was.
I find it VERY hard to believe that IBM never did manage to work
out what the problem was, and if they didnt, I wont be touching
any of the drives made by an operation that incompetant.
I find that hard to believe too.
Especially since it seems the internet community had found a likely
reason. Seems like only a later production batch failed.
All those review sites had early models and they still work fine. My
75GXP still works fine too, but that was also an early model.
But there are lots of reasons (valid reasons from their standpoint)
why they will never admit that.
The problem was that IBM never did admit
that there was any problem with that model.
And kept shipping the suckers another 75GXP
when the first one was RMAed, which went on
to fail itself quite a bit of the time. Utterly obscene.
True. Although I have heard some people who said they didn't want a
75GXP anymore, that got a new model.
Basically just a cleaner design. And thats got to be visible
in the price once the volume gets up to pata shipping levels.
Eventually that will be the case. But if right now a cleaner design
means a more expensive harddisk without any performance gain, what do
yuo expect the customers will do?
Bullshit. Drives are still doing what the physics allows.
The interface is irrelevant on speed with current drives.
Since when is the truth bullshit?
You dont get any better performance with mechanically
identical drives which only differ in the interface used.
Ah, now I see what you shouted bullshit. You didn't understand what I
meant. I was comparing harddisks that you can buy in stores.
(difficult to compare performance otherwise)
And of those, the bridged models are faster than the native models
that another manufacturer makes.
But of course, if the drive is mechanically identical and only the
interface is different, then bridges can never be faster.
One advantage with sata drives is the cleaner cabling.
That's why I bought an sata raid5 controller.
Longer cables can be an advantage too, although most people will not
have had much problems with that.
One risk currently is that the technology isnt as mature.
Thats what matters performance wise with hard drives.
Particuarly the basics physics of rpm, platter sizes,
numbers of platters etc for a particular capacity.
Of course all of that matters for the person designing a new disk. And
it matters to me as hardware enthousiast, but it does not matter to me
as buyer.
I just want a fast and silent disk for a good price.
And in making that choice I don't care if they used pixie dust, or GMR
heads or native sata or whatever.
And that can mean that right now a bridged sata drive from
manufacturer A is faster cheaper and just as silent as a native sata
drive from manufacturer B. And I will buy from A.
In 6 months it might be the other way around. If I need a new disk
then, I will make a new choice, based on the actual performace of the
models that are available then.
Optical drives dont even get within a bulls roar
of exploiting what the pata interface can do.
Current harddisks don't need the higher bandwith of SATA either.
Although there are some other features of SATA that can be
interesting.
The only real advantage is a cleaner cabling system.
That can be handy with bigger cases and optical drives.
That is usually the main reason people buy sata harddisks too.
If that generates a big enough market for harddisks, then why not for
optical drives.
And the main downside is that there are few motherboards
with that many sata ports currently, not enough to be
able to handle the 4 drives of any type many want to have.
That could well be a reason.
Nope, they dont get anywhere near wringing out the pata interfaces now.
So which advantages are there for harddisk that optical drives cannot
use?
- longer cables. Just as usefull for optical drives as for harddisks
- cleaner cables. Just as usefull for optical drives
- faster. Not important for optical drives, but not really important
for harddisks either. Even with two modern disks on 1 pata cable you
won't find a slowdown. Unless you use the most extreme worst case
scenario you can design in a benchmark. But in that case you are
usually also hitting the limit of the 33Mhz/32bit PCI interface.
- there are features like tagged command queueing in sata which is
mainly important for harddisks, but support for that isn't common in
harddisks yet.
- there are also some other features in sata that make a sata Maxtor
Diamondmax9 clearly faster then a pata Maxtor Diamondmax 9 which uses
a mechanical identical drive. But that same advantage is not visible
with the Baracuda V. So I don't know what is causing that.
http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q1/ata-comparo/index.x?pg=6
Please add the other advantages you see, because this list doesn't
seem to warrant the lack of optical sata drives imo.
Nope, because there arent many motherboard with JUST sata ports.
What about the reason that others have offered that lost of sata
adapters just don't have support for sata atapi devices in their
software?
You know anything more about that?
Marc
M
Marc de Vries
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:51:43 +0100, "Folkert Rienstra"
Does it matter what causes it?
As long as this software matter isn't fixed optical drive
manufacturers won't use SATA. And rightly so.
But does anybody know why this is not supported in the software?
Afaik atapi is supported in the sata standards. It can't have been all
that difficult or costly to add support in the software in the first
place?
Marc
Which is a pure software matter (driver), not hardware.
Does it matter what causes it?
As long as this software matter isn't fixed optical drive
manufacturers won't use SATA. And rightly so.
But does anybody know why this is not supported in the software?
Afaik atapi is supported in the sata standards. It can't have been all
that difficult or costly to add support in the software in the first
place?
Marc
R
Rod Speed
Yeah.
Luckily it was just my system disk and I had moved most data
to some new disks on a raid5 controller I bought the week before.
But it still costs a lot of time.
Yeah, drive failure is a real pain in the arse,
even if you are religiously backed up, with
all except real hot swap raid5 etc which very
few can justify for personal desktop systems.
Their policy is that they don't do that.
And thats one of the reasons they can take their drives
and shove them where the sun dont shine and I choose
to use drive manufacturers with a clue on that stuff.
Luckily, in Europe, they don't make such a
fuss about the shipping container as in the US.
Its always been a terminal stupidity when
cross shipping fixes that problem completely.
I would certainly want cross shipment there too.
But the competition doesn't cross ship here either.
Bullshit.
But that might be different in the US too?
And in plenty of other places too.
Took about a week before I had the replacement.
Plenty have had to wait a lot longer
than that, reported in here alone.
That's about the same as I heard from other companies.
Not relevant with a cross ship.
Luckily I had a spare drive lying around,
so it didn't really bother me much.
Yeah, I have full spare PCs so its really just a nuisance.
Its just another example of a terminal
stupidity in the way they operate tho.
I've always been into dealing with operations
that have got their act into gear on the detail.
Thats why I dont bother with Maxtor. We have
to ship the drive to Singapore using a receipted
delivery system if the seller of the drive has gone
bust, and thats not cheap at all. Bugger that. They
can shove their drives where the sun dont shine too.
Relax Rod, I know.
That's why I put the smiley there.
Duh.
I find that hard to believe too.
Especially since it seems the internet
community had found a likely reason.
Nope.
Seems like only a later production batch failed.
Wrong.
All those review sites had early models and they still work fine.
Wrong. Plenty of those died too.
My 75GXP still works fine too,
There's only ever been a single drive model where every
single copy failed in the field, made by that Indian operation.
but that was also an early model.
Thats irrelevant to failure rates.
But there are lots of reasons (valid reasons from
their standpoint) why they will never admit that.
Then they can take their drives and
shove them where the sun dont shine.
True. Although I have heard some people who said they
didn't want a 75GXP anymore, that got a new model.
Sure, but most were told to like it or lump it and what
appears to have happened is that even those stupids
eventually managed to work out that it made a lot
more sense to ship a different model instead. Pity it
took so long for them to come to their senses on that.
No wonder that operation went bust.
Eventually that will be the case. But if right now a cleaner design
means a more expensive harddisk without any performance gain,
Wrong.
what do yuo expect the customers will do?
Most wont be silly enough to bother with sata for quite a while.
Since when is the truth bullshit?
When it aint 'the truth' and is actually just bullshit.
Ah, now I see what you shouted bullshit.
You didn't understand what I meant.
Wrong. Again.
I was comparing harddisks that you can buy in stores.
So was I. There aint a single one where the sata
interface adds a damned thing to the performance,
because the pata version isnt pushing the pata interface.
(difficult to compare performance otherwise)
Duh.
And of those, the bridged models are faster than
the native models that another manufacturer makes.
Wrong again.
But of course, if the drive is mechanically identical
And they always are currently with drives from a
particular manufacturer in sata and pata format.
and only the interface is different,
then bridges can never be faster.
And sata cant be faster than pata either.
That's why I bought an sata raid5 controller.
Yep, there are a few situations where the
cleaner cabling system is more convenient.
Longer cables can be an advantage too,
Thats what I meant, both thinner and longer legally.
although most people will not
have had much problems with that.
Yep. The main problem is usually with the optical drives
on length and they arent mostly sata for other reasons yet.
Of course all of that matters for the person designing
a new disk. And it matters to me as hardware
enthousiast, but it does not matter to me as buyer.
I just want a fast and silent disk for a good price.
No need for sata then.
And in making that choice I don't care if they used
pixie dust, or GMR heads or native sata or whatever.
Or sata either.
And that can mean that right now a bridged sata drive from
manufacturer A is faster cheaper and just as silent as a
native sata drive from manufacturer B. And I will buy from A.
Just as true of pata.
In 6 months it might be the other way around. If I need
a new disk then, I will make a new choice, based on the
actual performace of the models that are available then.
Just as true of the interface too. Particularly when currently
there arent that many systems that have just sata ports.
Current harddisks don't need the higher bandwith
of SATA either. Although there are some other
features of SATA that can be interesting.
Not with optical drives. There isnt
formal ATAPI support with sata yet.
That is usually the main reason people buy sata harddisks too.
Nope. Its mostly stupids buying the
latest thing because its the latest thing.
If that generates a big enough market for
harddisks, then why not for optical drives.
Mainly because ATAPI isnt formally part of sata yet.
That could well be a reason.
Yeah, that clearly cripples the market
for sata optical drives currently.
So which advantages are there for
harddisk that optical drives cannot use?
Its more the other way, lack of ATAPI currently,
and a perception of not much of a market while
most motherboards cant have purely sata drives.
- longer cables. Just as usefull for optical drives as for harddisks
More useful in fact with all cables going
from the drive to the motherboard directly.
Pity that few motherboards currently
have enough sata connectors tho.
- cleaner cables. Just as usefull for optical drives
- faster. Not important for optical drives, but not really important
for harddisks either. Even with two modern disks on 1 pata cable
you won't find a slowdown. Unless you use the most extreme worst
case scenario you can design in a benchmark.
Yep, but hard drives are close to needing that than
optical drives. Which is why ATAPI isnt in sata yet.
But in that case you are usually also hitting
the limit of the 33Mhz/32bit PCI interface.
Nope, because most hard drives dont use that.
- there are features like tagged command queueing
in sata which is mainly important for harddisks, but
support for that isn't common in harddisks yet.
You dont need sata for that, its been available
in pata for years now. And is hardly used at all.
- there are also some other features in sata that make
a sata Maxtor Diamondmax9 clearly faster then a pata
Maxtor Diamondmax 9 which uses a mechanical identical drive.
Bullshit.
But that same advantage is not visible with the Baracuda V.
More bullshit.
So I don't know what is causing that.
Its a fantasy.
Please add the other advantages you see, because this list
doesn't seem to warrant the lack of optical sata drives imo.
Lack of ATAPI does. And the lack of enough sata ports too.
What about the reason that others have offered
that lost of sata adapters just don't have support
for sata atapi devices in their software?
Yep, another important factor.
You know anything more about that?
What is there to know ? atapi isnt part of sata yet.
F
Folkert Rienstra
Marc de Vries said:Does it matter what causes it?
As long as this software matter isn't fixed optical drive
manufacturers won't use SATA. And rightly so.
I think that John just took the usual failure of add-on/add-in PCI
hostbus ATA controllers to support ATAPI devices and extended
it to the add-on/add-in PCI hostbus SATA controllers.
PC chipset native controllers never had problems with ATAPI, only
the Promises and Highpoints of the busisness have those problems.
Actually, it would surprise me very much that the Intel ICH SATA
driver will not support ATAPI.
But does anybody know why this is not supported in the software?
Sheer stupidity.
M
Marc de Vries
And thats one of the reasons they can take their drives
and shove them where the sun dont shine and I choose
to use drive manufacturers with a clue on that stuff.
That must make your choose of drive manufacturers very small.
Maxtor and WD have the same policy.
Its always been a terminal stupidity when
cross shipping fixes that problem completely.
It's the same with almost any component in your PC.
Having such a negative fixation on IBM/Hitachi when they do the same
as the rest of the industry is pretty stupid too.
Bullshit.
Is it?
And why do you think so? Do you live in the Netherlands?
Do you know the policy for Maxtor and WD here?
And in plenty of other places too.
Plenty have had to wait a lot longer
than that, reported in here alone.
Well, this is not the only hardware group on the internet.
Maybe the people in the Netherlands are just more efficient in these
matters?
Not relevant with a cross ship.
Not relevant since they don't cross ship either.
Yeah, I have full spare PCs so its really just a nuisance.
Its just another example of a terminal
stupidity in the way they operate tho.
I've always been into dealing with operations
that have got their act into gear on the detail.
Thats why I dont bother with Maxtor. We have
to ship the drive to Singapore using a receipted
delivery system if the seller of the drive has gone
bust, and thats not cheap at all. Bugger that. They
can shove their drives where the sun dont shine too.
So IBM/Hitachi stinks because they don't cross ship, Maxtor too.
That means you won't like WD and Seagate either.
No we have had all the major players in the harddisk market.
Which harddisks do you use?
Duh.
Oh boy. Don't you know why people use smileys?
Yes
Wrong.
Not wrong
Wrong. Plenty of those died too.
Not wrong.
There's only ever been a single drive model where every
single copy failed in the field, made by that Indian operation.
Really? Which model might that have been then, since that description
does not fit the 75GXP.
Thats irrelevant to failure rates.
It isn't.
Then they can take their drives and
shove them where the sun dont shine.
Sure, but most were told to like it or lump it and what
appears to have happened is that even those stupids
eventually managed to work out that it made a lot
more sense to ship a different model instead. Pity it
took so long for them to come to their senses on that.
They people that were told to lump it were probably people like you
who can't discuss things like this in a normal way.
This like you have shown above that you can't act like a grown up and
continue this discussion in a normal way.
No wonder that operation went bust.
it didn't.
Wrong.
not wrong.
Most wont be silly enough to bother with sata for quite a while.
Guess dutch costumers are silly then, because lot of hem already
bother with sata.
The US is walking behind in this?
When it aint 'the truth' and is actually just bullshit.
Too bad for you that it is the truth in this case.
But I've realised that you are not interested in facts. So I won't
bother you with them again.
Wrong. Again.
I see no indication that I am.
Then again you could be just a Troll and now very well what I mean.
So was I. There aint a single one where the sata
interface adds a damned thing to the performance,
because the pata version isnt pushing the pata interface.
I've given a link to a test on tech-report that shows without a doubt
that it does.
But again facts don't interest you. You'd rather live in the little
fantasy world in your head where that doesn't happen.
Wrong again.
Not wrong. Just lookat the tests on dozens of review sites, or test
them yourself. The facts are there, for people that open their eyes.
And they always are currently with drives from a
particular manufacturer in sata and pata format.
And sata cant be faster than pata either.
Open your eyes Rod.
There IS a difference. You might not know WHY, and I don't know
either. But the fact is that there is a very clear difference in those
tests.
Yep, there are a few situations where the
cleaner cabling system is more convenient.
Thats what I meant, both thinner and longer legally.
Yep. The main problem is usually with the optical drives
on length and they arent mostly sata for other reasons yet.
No need for sata then.
Or sata either.
Just as true of pata.
Of course. But the fact is that when I choose my new drives the SATA
version was clearly faster then the PATA version. So the choice was
easy.
Just as true of the interface too. Particularly when currently
there arent that many systems that have just sata ports.
Most new systems have them now.
But in my case I needed to buy a raid5 controller anyway, so that
wasn't an easy. (unless it would be much more expensive, which it
wasn't)
Not with optical drives. There isnt
formal ATAPI support with sata yet.
Wrong. There is aparantly formal atapi support with sata.
But there are serious issues with using atapi devices with sata
bridges. Those have also been raised with the T13 group:
http://www.t13.org/docs2003/e03131r0.pdf
Once again the standards on this are not good enough to prevent issues
like this.
Nope. Its mostly stupids buying the
latest thing because its the latest thing.
In your case, that yould probably be the reason yes.
Mainly because ATAPI isnt formally part of sata yet.
That's not what T13 says.
Yeah, that clearly cripples the market
for sata optical drives currently.
I see no reason what that "clearly" cripples the market.
Shouting something like that is easy. Now try to support that claim.
Its more the other way, lack of ATAPI currently,
and a perception of not much of a market while
most motherboards cant have purely sata drives.
More useful in fact with all cables going
from the drive to the motherboard directly.
Pity that few motherboards currently
have enough sata connectors tho.
A pity yes. Especially since those longer cables are needed for people
that want to place a optical drive in the top 5,25" bay of their
bigtower case.
Yep, but hard drives are close to needing that than
optical drives. Which is why ATAPI isnt in sata yet.
Nope, because most hard drives dont use that.
That is only true when they are connected directly to the southbridge
without using pci in between.
This NOT the case for the majority of motherboards.
You dont need sata for that, its been available
in pata for years now. And is hardly used at all.
Bullshit.
I know realises that this is your standards answer when you are
confronted with facts you don't like.
More bullshit.
again that your standard answer
Its a fantasy.
You are calling the people from tech-report liars?
Give me one reason why I should not believe their test, but should
believe a person in a newsgroup who can only answer with the word
bullshit.
Especially since this results can also be seen in other tests on other
sites. But don't let that bother you.
Just call them all liars too.
Lack of ATAPI does. And the lack of enough sata ports too.
Yep, another important factor.
What is there to know ? atapi isnt part of sata yet.
I suggest you read the specs on sata again.
But that advice will probably fall on deaf ears.
You are clearly not capable of discussing these matters as a civilized
person, but instead start acting like a 5 year old kid.
I am not going to waste my time on people that behave like that. You
can continu this thread without me.
Marc
R
Rod Speed
That must make your choose of drive manufacturers very small.
Nope, just excludes IBM/Hitachi.
Maxtor and WD have the same policy.
Completely wrong.
R
Rod Speed
That must make your choose of drive manufacturers very small.
Nope, just excludes IBM/Hitachi.
Maxtor and WD have the same policy.
Completely wrong.
It's the same with almost any component in your PC.
Nope, nothing like it. Its only with hard drives that the
manufacturers have that sort of stringent demands on
the packaging used when returning an RMAed device.
Having such a negative fixation on IBM/Hitachi when they
do the same as the rest of the industry is pretty stupid too.
Not a ****ing clue, as always.
WHEN THEY WILL CROSS SHIP, YOU CAN USE THE
PACKAGING THAT THE REPLACEMENT ARRIVES IN TO
RETURN THE FAILED DRIVE AND THE MANUFACTURER
CANNOT POSSIBLY CLAIM THAT THE PACKAGING IS
INADEQUATE AND VOIDS THE WARRANTY ON THAT BASIS.
Surely even you cant actually be THAT stupid.
Is it?
Yep, complete and utter bullshit.
And why do you think so?
Because I have seen individuals
say they have had a cross ship done.
Do you live in the Netherlands?
Dont need to.
Do you know the policy for Maxtor and WD here?
Dont need to 'live' there to check that, fool.
So it doesnt matter a damn what happens in that soggy
little 'country', what matters is what happens world wide.
Well, this is not the only hardware group on the internet.
Must be one of those rocket scientist fools.
Never ever said it was and that aint relevant
to what's been reported in here alone on lousy
turnaround times with IBM/Hitachi drives anyway.
Maybe the people in the Netherlands
are just more efficient in these matters?
All completely and utterly irrelevant to
the vast number of drive owners that dont
happen to 'live' in that soggy little 'country'
What matters for them when considering what drive to
buy is the turnarounds seen IN THEIR COUNTRY, stupid.
Not relevant since they don't cross ship either.
Pity that most of them do.
So IBM/Hitachi stinks because they don't cross ship,
You did get that right.
Maxtor too.
They'll cross ship. The problem is what they
require to be used with the return of the failed
drive and the cost of doing it like that, stupid.
That means you won't like WD and Seagate either.
Wrong again.
No we have had all the major players in the harddisk market.
Pity you aint established that they wont cross ship TO ME.
Which harddisks do you use?
Varied over the years.
Currently I prefer Samsungs.
Oh boy. Don't you know why people use smileys?
Just another of your pathetic little fantasys.
Nope.
Not wrong
Completely wrong.
And even someone as stupid as you should be able
to grasp that if it was actually just a batch problem,
even IBM should have been able to work that out and
we wouldnt have seen 75GXPs RMAed and replaced
with another drive that went on to fail itself.
And even someone as stupid as you should be able to find
plenty of examples of that happening in this group alone.
Not wrong.
Completely wrong.
Even someone as stupid as you should be able to find
plenty of examples of that happening in this group alone.
Really?
Yes, really.
Which model might that have been then,
since that description does not fit the 75GXP.
Duh. It was a unique brand too. They only
made one model and every single one died.
I've got one lying around somewhere,
back in the low 100s of MB drive days.
It isn't.
Wrong. As always.
They people that were told to lump it were probably people
like you who can't discuss things like this in a normal way.
Even you should be able to manage better than that puerile stunt.
This like you have shown above that you can't act like a
grown up and continue this discussion in a normal way.
Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself eh ?
it didn't.
It did. It ended up a rat hole for money and IBM
flogged it off to the biggest sucker they could fined.
not wrong.
Completely wrong.
Guess dutch costumers are silly then,
because lot of hem already bother with sata.
Even someone as stupid as you should be able
to work out the difference between 'lot' and 'most'
The US is walking behind in this?
MOST certainly aint buying sata currently.
Too bad for you that it is the truth in this case.
Just another of your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasys.
But I've realised that you are not interested in
facts. So I won't bother you with them again.
Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament better than that pathetic effort, child.
I see no indication that I am.
Thats because you've obviously wanked yourself blind.
You were warned about what that would do to your eyesight, child.
Then again you could be just a Troll
and now very well what I mean.
I could be the bogeyman too, chiid.
I've given a link to a test on tech-report
that shows without a doubt that it does.
Like hell it does.
But again facts don't interest you. You'd rather live in the
little fantasy world in your head where that doesn't happen.
What a stunning mature and rational
approach you flaunt there, child.
Not wrong.
Completely wrong.
Just look at the tests on dozens of review sites,
Which dont show anything like you claim they show.
or test them yourself. The facts are
there, for people that open their eyes.
You wouldnt know what a fact was if
one bit you on your lard arse, child.
Even with something as basic as what
drive manufacturers do cross ship RMAs.
Open your eyes Rod.
Let go of your dick, de Vries.
There IS a difference. You might not know WHY,
and I don't know either. But the fact is that there
is a very clear difference in those tests.
But not due to what you stupidly claim, child.
Of course. But the fact is that when I choose my new drives
the SATA version was clearly faster then the PATA version.
Pity it aint for the reason you claimed.
So the choice was easy.
Only if you're childishly focusing on very superficial
benchmarks that have no real relevance in the real
world with personal desktop systems.
Most new systems have them now.
Almost no new personal desktop
systems have JUST sata ports, stupid.
But in my case I needed to buy a raid5 controller
anyway, so that wasn't an easy. (unless it would
be much more expensive, which it wasn't)
Sure, sata can be handy in some situations,
particularly were there are a number of drives,
on the better approach to cabling alone, let
alone full hot swap support in the standard too.
Right.
There is aparantly formal atapi support with sata.
Wrong.
But there are serious issues with using atapi devices with sata
bridges. Those have also been raised with the T13 group:
http://www.t13.org/docs2003/e03131r0.pdf
Once again the standards on this are not
good enough to prevent issues like this.
Which is what I meant when I said that there isnt good enough
formal support for atapi in the sata standard yet, stupid.
In your case, that yould probably be the reason yes.
Any 3 year old could do better than that pathetic effort, child.
I've already told you that I dont bother with
the latest stuff just because its the latest.
And I dont normally bother with the bleeding edge either,
just because there will normally be warts that still need to
be excised, just like there currently is with atapi and sata.
That's not what T13 says.
Wrong. As always.
I see no reason what that "clearly" cripples the market.
Maybe you actually are that stupid.
Lets go thru it very very slowly for the terminally stupid.
While ever very few personal desktop system
come with JUST sata ports, and while ever there
are still problems with atapi and sata, that has
to cripple the market for sata optical drives when
there isnt even any performance advantage possible.
Shouting something like that is easy.
Just as true of your mindless spew.
Now try to support that claim.
After you, child.
A pity yes. Especially since those longer cables are
needed for people that want to place a optical drive
in the top 5,25" bay of their bigtower case.
Thats a pretty small market tho.
And while ever the much more important factor,
motherboard chipsets that allow JUST sata
ports isnt buyable, its hardly surprising that the
manufacturers of optical drives concentrate on
other things like supporting more DVD modes
etc and driving down the cost of their drives
particularly with burners so that cost of the drive
become low enough that few hesitate to buy one.
That is only true when they are connected directly
to the southbridge without using pci in between.
Which just happens to be how most hard drives
in personal desktop systems are connected.
This NOT the case for the majority of motherboards.
Bullshit with new personal desktop systems.
And those that do it the other way clearly arent worried
about the performance downsides of that approach
and are just the cheap end of motherboards, for users
that likely wouldnt even noticed any performance
difference at all, because of the way they use their PCs.
I know realises that this is your standards answer
when you are confronted with facts you don't like.
Not a clue. As always.
again that your standard answer
Again, not a clue. As always.
You are calling the people from tech-report liars?
Nope.
Give me one reason why I should not believe their test,
Never said you shouldnt, child.
but should believe a person in a newsgroup
who can only answer with the word bullshit.
More of your pathological lying.
Especially since this results can also
be seen in other tests on other sites.
Which dont actually show what YOU claim they show.
But don't let that bother you.
Just call them all liars too.
I've only ever called you a liar in this thread, child.
I suggest you read the specs on sata again.
No need.
But that advice will probably fall on deaf ears.
Better than blind eyes I spose.
You are clearly not capable of discussing these matters as
a civilized person, but instead start acting like a 5 year old kid.
Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself do you child ?
I am not going to waste my time on people that behave like that.
You just did, child.
You can continu this thread without me.
Great, there is only so much pathetic excuse for bullshit
and childish antics anyone should have to put up with.
Dont let the door hit you on the arse on the way out, child.