Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!att!chinet!pdg
From: pdg@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul Guthrie)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: unix, PCs and SCSI
Message-ID: <1989Nov15.172322.4863@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 15 Nov 89 17:23:22 GMT
References: <6081@shlump.nac.dec.com> <6700039@adaptex>
Reply-To: pdg@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul Guthrie)
Organization: The League of Crafty Hackers
Lines: 18

In article <6700039@adaptex> neese@adaptex.UUCP writes:
>>Will it be cheaper?
>My philosophy on the cost factor:  If cost is your primary concern, then
>SCSI is a poor choice. 

I have to disagree with this.  If you are planning on adding a tape drive,
SCSI will probably be cheaper than going with a RLL or ESDI drive
and controller and tape drive and proprietary controller.  When I
went shopping, the archive 150 meg tape was 900 for the SCSI, and 1800
for the proprietary controller version.  Plus, the SCSI method saves you
an IRQ *and* slot that the tape controller would normally take up
(and that is a *big* consideration on a AT bus).  All in all a clear
win.  Plus I can reuse the hardware if I go to another platform (Suns
150 meg tapes are just archives), etc.  Go with SCSI, you won't
regret it.
-- 
Paul Guthrie
chinet!nsacray!paul