On Dec 14, 2004, at 10:30 AM, Rudolfo Munguia wrote:
> A rather popular mis-conception that really needs to be dismissed
> A.S.A.P. is that SATA is superior to ATA.
>
> It is not.
I have no personal experience or detailed scholarship to back this up
but I do have a new computer design text that flatly says SATA is
faster and cheaper.
>
> The reasons originally quoted by most manufacturers in the industry
> around 5-6 years ago when SATA was originally Developed:
>
> Cost
>
> ATA consumes more real-estate from both the semiconductor and
> motherboard perspective due to its complexity and the size of the
> physical bus connections (more pins required for the connection)
>
> Complexity
>
> As ATA Bus speeds increase, the mechanisms to keep the timing correct
> across data channels becomes increasingly harder to engineer,
> increasing the cost of engineering and the size of the chips- i.e.
> more real-estate would be needed
This is the big issue discussed in the text.
>
> Power
>
> The primary power consumption from a drive isn't it's motor, that only
> consumes a few watts to maintain it's momentum - especially as drive
> platters have decreased in mass over time. The ATA chipset, cache, and
> the armature for moving the heads consume the most power. And as the
> Bus speed increases so would their power draw.
>
> SATA was supposed to save motherboard space from both the chipset and
> connector size( saving cost ); lower the level of engineering required
> (saving cost ); and lower the power consumption (saving cost).
>
> All of these only benefit the Manufacturers cost of production, not
> the consumer, as most people who have moved to SATA can attest to
> generally higher cost.
>
> The only reasons being quoted as a consumer benefit from the
> technology back in the begining was "ease of installation" and "cost
> reduction".
It is difficult to follow what you are saying here. Certainly both
personal computers generally and drives specifically have fallen in
price since SATA drives were introduced. I don't doubt that SATA drives
may cost the same or more as ATA drives when purchased individually. I
don't think that means much at this point.
All that said, I certainly don't doubt anyone's personal experience. I
wish Bill would elaborate on what Dell and HP say.
Joe started this discussion with a concern about voiding the HP
warranty if he put Linux on his new machine. Is the HP warranty really
windows only?
---
Vegetarians eat Vegetables, Humanitarians frighten me
---------------------------------------------------
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
(text/plain)