Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!s.cs.uiuc.edu!carroll
From: carroll@s.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Adaptec&SpeedStor problems.
Message-ID: <213400038@s.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 4 Mar 89 18:59:00 GMT
References: <213400034@s.cs.uiuc.edu>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:s.cs.uiuc.edu:213400034:s.cs.uiuc.edu:213400038:000:1012
Nf-From: s.cs.uiuc.edu!carroll    Mar  4 12:59:00 1989


/* Written  8:28 am  Feb 24, 1989 by davis@clocs.cs.unc.edu in s.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.sys.ibm.pc */
>A recent posting made me wonder why it was necessary to use third
>party disk drivers in many cases.  (Speedstore, Disk Manager)
>the same time?)
>
>My real question is why bother with Speedstor.  (...)
>As near as I can tell, the only thing you buy by using Speedstor
>drivers is to have a single large partition and your files can be
>64Meg long instead of 32Meg.  You may trade performance (I have heard
>reports that speedstor slows stuff down somewhat) and compatibility.
>
No, actually SpeedStor greatly improved the disk throughput, and that's
the main reason I switched.

>A similar issue comes up with RLL drives.  Why let the controller fool
>the DOS about the number of sectors and cylinders.  Can't DOS (after 3
>something) handle any combinations of sectors and cylinders (as long
>as cylinders is ss than 1024).

As far as I know, SpeedStor doesn't fool DOS about the number of cylinders
and sectors.