Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!ucbvax!UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU!C506634
From: C506634@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU (Eric Edwards)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Re: A590 Controller
Message-ID: <900915.173041.CDT.C506634@UMCVMB>
Date: 15 Sep 90 22:30:41 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: Hackers Without Hard Drives
Lines: 21

In <1990Sep11.202511.17745@uncecs.edu>, utoddl@uncecs.edu (Todd M. Lewis) write
>In article <1952@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phill
>>Well, the A590 has the A590 controller. It's functionally equivalent to the
>>2091. There is no problem with overscan. It does have an interface that the
>>2091 does not have, but it is not ST506; it is IDE (or whatever the IBMers ca
>>their kludge).
>
>Wonderful.  So in theory it should be possible to make an A590 work with
>an A2000.  It would take some mechanical work, certainly, but shouldn't
>it be possible?
>
It would probably take a lot of electronic work to get it to work in a Zorro
slot.  It may not be necessary to go that route, however.  The CPU slot in the
A2000 is a varient of the A500's expansion port.  I have heard that many A500
expansion boxes will work from that port of they can be make to physically fit
under the A2000's case.  For the A590 you would need to use a cable to plug
it into the A2000 but leave the drive outside.

Eric Edwards: c506634 @    "The 3090.  Proof that by applying state of the
Inet: umcvmb.missouri.edu   art technology to an obsolete architecture,
Bitnet: umcvmb.bitnet       one can achieve mediocre performance."