SerialATA = OMG but now SerialAttachedSCSI = OMFG!!!!!!!!!!!!

[thorin]

About SAS

"Serial Attached SCSI is intended to directly address the future needs of these anticipated shifts in the market being driven by dense computing. This new proposed standard will provide the enterprise feature set of SCSI, including manageability, performance, reliability and scalability, with the serial interconnect offered with Serial ATA. This combination of features provides enterprise customers a highly robust data center solution, with a unique universal interconnect that provides a choice of incorporating a lower cost, desktop class Serial ATA product, or an enhanced Serial Attached SCSI product.

This choice will greatly improve data center manager's ability to provide the right type of storage based on quality of service requirements in the enterprise. If customers demand non-mission critical, scalable storage (where performance and 24x7 uptime is not required), a desktop class Serial ATA drive should be deployed. If users require server or storage subsystem access that is mission critical, where the quality of service is geared towards increased performance and reliability, users can take advantage of Serial Attached SCSI which will utilize the same physical connecter inside the subsystem. "

Thorin

 

[Pabster]

 

[Adul]

coo!

 

[Biggs]

Sweet!

 

[Mday]

old news... about 2 years behind the times y'all are

 

[LostHiWay]

not surprising at all. Most people seemed to think that serial ATA would eventually overtake SCSI..well not now. There will always be 2 classes of drives cheap and really expensive.

 

[Alex]

tight!

 

[MadRat]

<<There will always be 2 classes of drives cheap and really expensive.>>

Huh...what? Did you mean "consumer and commercial" perhaps?

 

[Dreadogg]

 

[Rainsford]

It would be great if instead of concentrating on the interface drive companies would make faster drives. I mean, ATA133 is pretty much overkill right now, do I really need Serial ATA for my 7200 RPM drive? And for that matter, do I really need a faster drive at all? Seems to me that hard drives are hardly the bottleneck in a system as long as you have a decent amount of RAM. At least for what I do. I donno, JMHO.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
It would be great if instead of concentrating on the interface drive companies would make faster drives. I mean, ATA133 is pretty much overkill right now, do I really need Serial ATA for my 7200 RPM drive? And for that matter, do I really need a faster drive at all? Seems to me that hard drives are hardly the bottleneck in a system as long as you have a decent amount of RAM. At least for what I do. I donno, JMHO.

dude it takes me like forever to load up quake! i NEED a faster drive!

 

[Daemon_UK]

Yeah, they should concentrate on trying to make a 15k rpm drive for the customer, and THEN making sure the interface could feed the data quickly.

Not the other way around

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Rainsford
It would be great if instead of concentrating on the interface drive companies would make faster drives. I mean, ATA133 is pretty much overkill right now, do I really need Serial ATA for my 7200 RPM drive? And for that matter, do I really need a faster drive at all? Seems to me that hard drives are hardly the bottleneck in a system as long as you have a decent amount of RAM. At least for what I do. I donno, JMHO.

dude it takes me like forever to load up quake! i NEED a faster drive!

If waiting 5 more seconds is too long for you, get SCSI and pay through the nose. Get used to that because once the Serial ATA drives come out (if the drives themselves are faster), you'll be paying through the nose for them too.

 

[Utterman]

Originally posted by: Daemon_UK
Yeah, they should concentrate on trying to make a 15k rpm drive for the customer, and THEN making sure the interface could feed the data quickly.

Not the other way around

That would be nice, but I would like to see solid state drives come out. No noise, fast transfers.

 

[imgod2u]

The benefits of serialization is not neccessarily in speed, but rather, convenience. No more shared channels, no more master/slave configs. Smaller cables, etc.

 

[thorin]

"Get used to that because once the Serial ATA drives come out (if the drives themselves are faster), you'll be paying through the nose for them too. "

Wrong. All the companies involved in the SerialATA working group have said point blank that there will be less then a 10% price premium when the drives first come out. Seagate (who just announced their SerialATA drive for this fall) has said only $10 more compared to the PATA version.

Thorin

 

[McCarthy]

Hmm, part of the S-ATA propoganda suite was that S-ATA is to cost no more than P-ATA. $10 is a lot when drives are anywhere from $50 to $150 depending on capacity.

Just continues to amaze me how excited people can get about a new plug.

--Mc

 

[MadRat]

If its not hot swappable then it can kiss my ass...


























j/k.

 

[thorin]

"Hmm, part of the S-ATA propoganda suite was that S-ATA is to cost no more than P-ATA. "

Agreed and I'm sure the manufacturers will sell them at the same COST however it is likely that stores will sell them for slightly more. Since:
1) They'll be in high demand and low supply (initially).
2) They can advertise them as being "so" much faster. (And Joe Consumer will fall for it).

Thorin