Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:47504 comp.periphs.scsi:265
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!xstor!iverson
From: iverson@xstor.UUCP (Tim Iverson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: MFM and SCSI together ?
Message-ID: <7@xstor.UUCP>
Date: 29 Mar 90 22:40:02 GMT
References: <1977@crash.cts.com>
Reply-To: iverson@xstor.UUCP (Tim Iverson)
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: Storage Dimensions, Inc.
Lines: 82

In article <1977@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes:
>iverson@xstor.UUCP (Tim Iverson) writes:
>What if you're using an OS that can only use the BIOS at power on to boot such
>as *nix?  Then you need a driver for each manufacturer's SCSI host adaptor to
>run under this vendor's operating system.

Well, we were talking about PC's running DOS, if you recall.  I guess it's
my own fault for dragging Novel in as an aside.  Yes, you need a driver.

>Obviously the vendor isn't going to provide it unless it is a
>commonly used piece of hardware.

I assume you mean a popular OS (not just hardware) - the board itself
restricts the HW options.  What you mean is not really true.  The vendors
that are committed to SCSI provide drivers for the popular OSes available
on the platforms their boards run under (e.g. Adaptec).

>[...]  Anybody who needs SCSI such as hell isn't going to use DOS with it
> since it would be a waste.

I don't see the connection between DOS and SCSI and waste.  What is being
wasted?  As far as SCSI drives on DOS are concerned, installation is much,
much easier than ESDI.  Reliability and performance of the drive is
identical to comparable ESDI drives (e.g. a Maxtor 8760E performs the same
as a Maxtor 8760S).  Reliability and performance of the SCSI subsystem is
usually much better.  Price is comparable, it not identical.

>The word here is recommendation.  Anything I post I wouldn't recommend doing
>for a customer or myself.

You wouldn't recommend doing what you say to do in your postings? :-) You
probably meant something like "I was only making recomendations ...".

If this was true, then perhaps I was hasty with the blow-torch, but I think
not.  The tone of your article presented your "recomendations" as fact.  If
you had said something like: "I know nothing about SCSI on PCs, but this is
what I *imagine* to be true ...", your original article would have been
more factual.  It's ok to grant the benifit of the doubt to others, but not
to yourself.

>[...]  I am not convinced of how well SCSI is supported in the IBM
>compatable domain.  Every manufacturer does their SCSI host adaptor
>differently which means problems [...]

You don't think the 1003 "compatible" controllers have problems?  Ha!  We
continually need to update the SpeedStor driver and program to work around
problems each vendor introduces into each board.  Typically, these are not
HW bugs, but questions about interpreting the 1003 design - it is not a
well specified standard (for a long while it was the only one, though).  WD
and Adaptec are not the worst offenders in the area of 1003-style
controllers, but both have plenty of problems - some of them fairly serious.

>Multitasking operating systems don't use the BIOS.

Right.  True.  Correct.  I assumed you knew that I knew this.  Sorry if I
gave the impression that I didn't - probably shouldn't have granted myself
the benifit of the doubt.  :-)

>[[paraphrased] Unless the board has a proteced mode BIOS, you]
>need a driver for the SCSI host adaptor you're using [...]

I haven't heard of any protected mode BIOSes (or OSes that use them), but
that's not to say it's impossible.

>Again, the problem of "where do I get that damned driver to run this
>controller with this OS?" comes into play.

This is not hard unless the OS is new or obscure.

>Try using anything other than Novell's DCB board with NetWare 386, you will
>find that it will not work by longshot.

This (386 Netware, as opposed to 286) falls under the "new" category.
Expect lotsa drivers real soon ...

>     // JCA
> ** ARPANET : crash!pnet01!jca@nosc.mil     | mine.  Bill Gates couldn't buy
> ** INTERNET: jca@pnet01.cts.com            | it, but he could rent it.  :)
> ** UUCP    : {nosc ucsd hplabs!hd-sdd}!crash!pnet01!jca

- Tim Iverson
  uunet!xstor!iverson