On Dec 14, 2004, at 1:34 PM, Bill Earl wrote:

> Chris Gehlker wrote:
>
>>
>> I understand. I was simply  curious as to how the commodity makers 
>> would respond to the issue especially in light of the fact that they 
>> seem to be going in the direction of 'SATA only.'
>>
> I fear that since we're just a small business with no major support 
> contracts that the response would have been a version of, "Oh, so 
> those ATA drives work better for you?  Well, that's okay then, just 
> use those."   ;-)

You're probably  right. I googled for SATA vs ATA disk drives and 
discovered some reviews where they compared what amounted to identical 
drive mechanisms from the same manufacturer except with ATA vs SATA and 
got identical results.

Tom's Hardware made the interesting observation that ATA has a 
theoretical bandwidth of 100 Mb/sec and UATA has 133 while SATA is 
supposed to hit 150 and SCSI 230. The best drive you can get at  Fry's 
has a bandwidth of 80 Mb/sec out of cache if you  happen to request 
something it just read, so in the standard configuration of a PC with 
one drive, plain old ATA is still faster than you will ever use.

--
We can put television in its proper light by supposing that Gutenberg's 
great invention had been directed at printing only comic books.
-Robert M. Hutchins, educator (1899-1977)


---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss