IDE HD, pls help

  • Thread starter Thread starter jazu
  • Start date Start date
J

jazu

Hi
If you build now new computers where SATA HDs should be installed, can you
install old type IDE HD?
What additional parts do you need?
thanks
 
If your new MB has and IDE port, then simply plug it in. SATA and IDE work
just fine together. If the MB doesn't have an IDE port, then you can
purchase a card for about $25.
 
Pat Glenn wrote: *** and top-posted. Fixed ***
If your new MB has and IDE port, then simply plug it in. SATA and
IDE work just fine together. If the MB doesn't have an IDE port,
then you can purchase a card for about $25.
Click to expand...

Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. I fixed this one. See how much better it
reads. Also see the following links:

--
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
<http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
<http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
 
I agree with Eric P and tpow - It looks MUCH better this way.

1) The reply is easier to understand and find relevant info, because:

2) I don't have to spend hours and hours scrolling to the bottom to find
where a reply begins. Finally;

3) If I need to reply to a specific portion, there is a copy and paste
function included with my compter.

Sorry, if I continue to 'offend you', but that's just too bad. I like the
way I reply.
 
I agree with Eric P and tpow - It looks MUCH better this way.

1) The reply is easier to understand and find relevant info,
Click to expand...

Not at all easier, because there is now no direct
chronological order to the conversation. Irrelevant bits of
prior posts should be snipped out and each thought you have
pertaining to what was written should be directly appended
below it. Note it IS the convention of this group, AND if
you were using a web forum they also do this not just by
default, but there is no other sane option.




because:
2) I don't have to spend hours and hours scrolling to the bottom to find
where a reply begins. Finally;
Click to expand...

Obviously you need intensive training using a keyboard and
mouse, since usenet can't be run by mental power alone like
windows or any other computer program!

I realize, it's a tough thing, hitting the "page down"
button two times, versus typing above what you felt was an
intelligent reply.

IOW, you're full of it.


3) If I need to reply to a specific portion, there is a copy and paste
function included with my compter.
Click to expand...

So hitting page down key is a hard thing but selectively
copying and pasting isn't? You have quite a quite set of
skills, an imbalanced set.

Sorry, if I continue to 'offend you', but that's just too bad. I like the
way I reply.
Click to expand...

Then find a group where it is the convention. It's not a
personal preference scenario, it's just senseless to not
keep a topic flowing by directly addressing what you are
replying to, else there wasn't any point in replying to that
particular post.
 
IOW, you're full of it.

And so are yiou


kony said:
Not at all easier, because there is now no direct
chronological order to the conversation. Irrelevant bits of
prior posts should be snipped out and each thought you have
pertaining to what was written should be directly appended
below it. Note it IS the convention of this group, AND if
you were using a web forum they also do this not just by
default, but there is no other sane option.




because:

Obviously you need intensive training using a keyboard and
mouse, since usenet can't be run by mental power alone like
windows or any other computer program!

I realize, it's a tough thing, hitting the "page down"
button two times, versus typing above what you felt was an
intelligent reply.

IOW, you're full of it.




So hitting page down key is a hard thing but selectively
copying and pasting isn't? You have quite a quite set of
skills, an imbalanced set.



Then find a group where it is the convention. It's not a
personal preference scenario, it's just senseless to not
keep a topic flowing by directly addressing what you are
replying to, else there wasn't any point in replying to that
particular post.
Click to expand...
 
Pat Glenn said:
I agree with Eric P and tpow - It looks MUCH better this way.

1) The reply is easier to understand and find relevant info, because:
Click to expand...

The reply is not easier to understand because there is no text to indicate
what you are replying to!
2) I don't have to spend hours and hours scrolling to the bottom to find
where a reply begins. Finally;
Click to expand...

Absolutely - if you cut out the irrelevent parts and reply to the text where
appropriate, there is no need to scroll through pages and pages of text.
Incidentally, if you look on your keyboard you will find an 'end' button.
Press it while holding the Ctrl key down and *magic* happens.
3) If I need to reply to a specific portion, there is a copy and paste
function included with my compter.
Click to expand...

Why would you want to copy and paste anything - you are clearly lazy and
like to save time, so just don't cut it out the relevant text in the first
place, then you won't have to copy/paste it back in!!!
Sorry, if I continue to 'offend you', but that's just too bad. I like the
way I reply.
Click to expand...

No 'offense' taken. I presume you like to drive the wrong way down 1-way
streets because it is easier for you too? The rules and guidlines are here
to help everyone work together. When you put your reply at the top of the
message, no one can see what you are talking about and the thread becomes
very quickly confused.
 
There is no rule to reply at the bottom.
Just a matter of (your) personal preference and others may like to reply
at the top.
Many time they is no need to read further and won't become confused.
 
Here a nice reaction, I found some time ago, on a similar discussion.

<QUOTE>
Subject:
Re: Top Posting
From:
"Bruce Chambers" <[email protected]>
Date:
Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:44:40 -0700
Newsgroups:
microsoft.public.windowsxp.newusers

Greetings --

"Top-posting" is placing the reply to an earlier post at the top,
as I've done. This is the default behavior of some news readers, such
as Outlook Express. Some people prefer top-posting, while others
prefer bottom-posting (as the term implies, placing replies _below_
the original message.)

While I think the issue is largely a matter of personal taste and
reading convenience, some people get quite fanatical about it,
claiming years of precedence for bottom-posting as the only "proper"
way to do it. It all reminds me of Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver's
Travels," and the wars between the Big-Endians and the Small-Endians
(iow, which end of a boiled egg should be broken first).

Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:



You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH
</QUOTE>
 
Thanks Eric
It's so nice to see people who are willing to be a little flexible in their
thinking and realize there are things about which one does not have to be so
dogmatic. However one posts their responses is quite irrelevant to their
content and understandability. Most of us are quite capable of reading and
understanding both methods.

As I said, I prefer top posting as it gets strait to the point without a lot
of searching. Truly this is a matter of preference and not of rules. If
there are rules, then they need to be enforced by a moderator - not by a
couple of pompous twits. It's unfortunate that people who presume to know so
much need to be such asses and throw their arrogance in other peoples faces.

Anonymity on the web, besides protecting people, has the unfortunate side
effect of making these jerks feel they are free to flame people at their
whim. I can assure you, these people wouldn't act in such a childish manner
if they were in a public place, but when they can hide behind anonymity they
feel invincible.

There's a function that one needs to keep in mind when working in these
groups. It's called a blocked senders list. GT and kony (whom I suspect are
hiding behind false acronyms anyways) have been added to mine.

Thanks again
 
Pat Glenn said:
Thanks Eric
It's so nice to see people who are willing to be a little flexible in
their thinking and realize there are things about which one does not have
to be so dogmatic. However one posts their responses is quite irrelevant
to their content and understandability. Most of us are quite capable of
reading and understanding both methods.
Click to expand...

That is where you are wrong. As soon as someone top-posts, the thread
chronology is lost and posts no longer make any sense. Example:

6. Reply 5
4. Reply 3
1. Original post
2. Reply 1
3. Reply 2
5. Reply 4

Just 2 top posts and the whole thread is unreadable.
 
Eric P. said:
There is no rule to reply at the bottom.
Click to expand...

Yes there is, it is just not enforced in most newsreader applications. As
adults, we are trusted to follow the rules and do it properly! Most of us
can manage that, but as with every rule, there are those who can't be
bothered!

Google for newsgroup etiquette, or 'netiquette' (a term I hate!) and educate
yourselves.
 
[snip]
"Top-posting" is placing the reply to an earlier post at the top,
as I've done. This is the default behavior of some news readers, such
as Outlook Express.
Click to expand...

Incidentally, I'm using the flawed outlook express now and I don't seem to
have placed my reply above everything else! I find that if one clicks the
mouse cursor near where your reply is supposed to go, then when you start
typing, the text appears in the right place. Fantastic - you should try it!
Some people prefer top-posting, while others
prefer bottom-posting (as the term implies, placing replies _below_
the original message.)

While I think the issue is largely a matter of personal taste and
reading convenience, [snip]
Click to expand...

The issue is not largely a matter of personal taste at all. The issue is
that some users can't follow simply instructions and rules, but instead opt
for a lazy approach which results in their replies being meaningless and
hard to read!

If you look for your last post you will notice the 2 dashes followed by a
space. Anything after that marker is automatically snipped, so your lazyness
has cut off the rest of the message again rendering your reply
chronologically meaningless !!
 
GT said:
Yes there is, it is just not enforced in most newsreader
applications. As adults, we are trusted to follow the rules and
do it properly! Most of us can manage that, but as with every rule,
there are those who can't be bothered!

Google for newsgroup etiquette, or 'netiquette' (a term I hate!)
and educate yourselves.
Click to expand...

And read the following selections:

<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
<http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
 
GT said:
What reaction? Your post ends here and you have not quoted any
reaction!
Click to expand...

Some newsreaders actually chop off sigs before presenting a message
for reading. While this is really an error, it may discourage
top-posters, because it will automatically chop off all that they
quoted.
 
Back
Top