Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!ariel.unm.edu!unmvax!uokmax!d.cs.okstate.edu!ong
From: ong@d.cs.okstate.edu (ONG ENG TENG)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: building a clone: good stuff vs. trash?
Message-ID: <1991Feb16.202022.2496@d.cs.okstate.edu>
Date: 16 Feb 91 20:20:22 GMT
References: <1991Feb15.201920.13743@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Lines: 9

From article <1991Feb15.201920.13743@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>, by lairdt@mist.CS.ORST.EDU (Tom Laird):
> First of all I'd get a different chassis.  The smaller chassis run hotter
> and are a big pain to upgrade at any point - not enough space.
> I also would avoid an IDE drive, especially a Seagate. IDE drives are SLOW
> and turn out about 500-600k per second throughput - a bad idea to hook up
> such a slow drive to a fast system.

IDE drive slow?  How about Conners IDE?  Most people I know seems to go
IDE way.  Is it just because of cost?