Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tekcrl!tekgvs!keithe
From: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: RLL controllers with MFM drives
Message-ID: <6298@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 6 Nov 89 02:15:51 GMT
References: <89110410221851@masnet.uucp>
Reply-To: keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 34

In article <89110410221851@masnet.uucp> wayne.ho@f526.n250.z1.fidonet.org (wayne ho) writes:

 
> > Oh, by the way.  Seagate is not going to develop anymore
> > MFM or RLL drives.
> > Seagate is now focusing on
> > SCSI drives so now this problem of MFM and RLL will be

Seagate has purchased/absorbed/taken over Imprimis, formerly known
as CDC, one of the foremost manufacturers of SCSI drives.  I only
hope the Seagate-ness doesn't rub off on Imprimis...
 
>So SCSI is the way to go??  I was thinking about purchacing a SCSI 
>controller and drive for my 386sx, but I have been warned against purchacing 
>a 16-bit SCSI controller.  Again, I don't know if this is true or not, 
>but someone told me that the 16-bit SCSI doesn't not work that well. 
>I was considering an 8-bit SCSI controller, what do you think?  Also, 
>what types of SCSI drives does Seagate have out at the moment?  If 
>you have any specs such as speed and size that would be nice to know. 

A 16-bit controller has a better chance of achieving maximum
transfer rate than does an 8-bit.  I measure (using Core27) a
transfer rate of about 1.4Megabytes (yes, 1,400 kilobytes) per
second with an Adaptec 1542A/Imprimis94181-702 (617.4 Megabytes
formatted) in an Everex STEP/25.  With the Seagate ST-)2 I got (as I
recall) certainly no better than 450 Kbytes/sec (if even that good;
as I recall it acted like a 2:1 MFM drive as far as transfer rate is
concerned).

My suggestion is to only purchase the ST-02 (or -01) if you simply
cannot afford one of the better (16 bit) controllers.  It's like
hooking up a 50-amp power supply with a 1/4 amp fuse.

kEITHe