Matter of fact is that so far no one was willing to work on a Blizzard SCSI driver, simply because no one saw the need for it.
No offense, but did you conduct a proper customer survey before reaching this conclusion?
@Tetisoft Quote:
The documentation for the AOne SCSI driver (lsi53c8xx.device) which can be found on os4depot.net as part of an (old) ide_driverpack.zip archive and on the OS4Final CD for A1 says that the driver was tested with an Epson GT7000 scanner.
My GT7000 arrived with an Adaptec SCSI card, should have it somewhere - any chance for support for it? They are more common (and cheaper) than LSI-based cards.
@Mikey_C Quote:
Note, scsi was good for its time, but like all things we have to move on.
To where? I think for the currently low powered (even with PPC accelerator) Classic Amigas it is still the best choice.
@all I can understand the reasoning behind lack of BPPC classic support - but I don't agree with it. I am all for releasing the OS4 for Classics as it it now and hope there will be (in time) a driver for BPPC SCSI. Like said before, it is not a showstopper.
I also want to stress that I really appreciate the work of all those involved in the development of OS4 and especially the classic Amiga version.
"Ain't Got no cash, Ain't got no style, Ladies vomit when I smile, but does Zoidberg worry?"
My GT7000 arrived with an Adaptec SCSI card, should have it somewhere - any chance for support for it? They are more common (and cheaper) than LSI-based cards.
The driver is for LSI, NCR and Symbios Logic 53Cxxx chips. The PCI SCSI boards with those chips are the cheapest which I could find at www.alternate.de, cheaper than Adaptec (of course not cheaper than a board which you already own). On EBay there also exist lots of such cards, and it looks as if only few buyers are interested in them.
Or in other words an external switched off(!) scanner should IMHO not affect the speed on the UW part of the SCSI bus, and eventually a switched on DVD-RAM does only affect the bus speed when its used (which may happen every few seconds when the filesystem checks for a disk change). Please correct me when I'm wrong.
You could also boot an OS3 installation to use the scanner on the motherboard SCSI port when you dont need the scanner very often.
BTW, even when the CSPPC has a theoretical maximum speed of 40 MB/sec and you would really reduce that by attaching all your SCSI equipment, its IMHO possible that OS4 will be faster than OS3. Raw bus transfer speed is not everything, CPU and OS speed are important too.
The bus is permanently set to the lowest speed device attached to it. When you work with files of 20-200 MB, I can assure you that the speedest drives you have, the lowest time you wait.
Bye, TMTisFree
Edited by TMTisFree on 2007/10/29 20:27:07
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
I am ready to pay for an usbscanner.device or a scsi.kmod if that will exist in the future.
Set up a bounty for BPPC/A4000T/A3000 scsi drivers, maybe there are external developers who will implement it. Maybe there is even someone who will implement SCSI drivers for free once the classic Amiga version of OS4 is released. But there is nobody in the OS4 team who will do it (not interested in SCSI at all, not having the required hardware, no knowledge about SCSI, no knowledge about scripts based SCSI chips (BPPC and A4000T), etc., for most it's all of that together), AFAIK we don't even have anyone who would or could do it if payed full time for it, which might require more money than the complete profit of Hyperion for the classic Amiga version of OS4, and definitely much more than for the few additional sales to users who wont buy OS4 as long as there is no BPPC, A4000T or A3000 SCSI driver.
The NCR on the A4000T is the ancestor of script LSI, no? So the system will stay as it is for the moment.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
Rogue wrote: The whole "SCSI vs. IDE" debate reminds me about "Beta vs. VHS" or "KDE vs. GNOME" or "Windows vs. OS/2". Especially since it is about as fruitless.
Let's face it. SCSI hardware is a hell of a lot more expensive than IDE. You pay about ? 1.50 per gigabyte on SCSI and about ? 0,3 on SATA. The speed difference is neglectable, you won't notice it unless you run a "make-me-happy" type benchmark program.
Error tolerance is not better on any of those.
So it all boils down to price, and sorry to say so but SCSI is overpriced, a lot more complicated to set up (termination, SCSI ID, cabling) and plainly nobody but workstations ever uses it anyway.
The speed is as different as someone who uses SCSI all the day long and someone who is not. I absolutely do not notice the speed difference because I do not use IDE drive(s). Of course it's overpriced. My drives all come with a 5 years garantee, run at 10000/15000 tpm, have an interface which handles 160/320 Mb/s, output data like no IDE drive will never reach, etc, etc.
So I will keep my system as it is.
Bye TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
Rogue wrote: There is a limited amount of hardware that can be supported. We do not even try to support all the clockport/Zorro/made-up zorro/solder-to-mainboard type of hardware that is around.
Since you need a CyberStormPPC, SCSI equipment can be used on the 3000/4000/4000T via the CyberStorm's SCSI port, I can't see the reasoning why the onboard SCSI needs to be supported.
Quote:
For the moment I can use my scanner on the PC with USB (impossible with A1/OS4, no USB driver)
Why not buy one of the supposedly cheap SCSI cards? Actually, there is support for one in AmigaOS 4 on the AmigaOne.
Quote:
and on the A4000T with SCSI (impossible with A4000T/OS4 no USB/SCSI driver). I see no reason to change to a product that do not met my requirement(s) be it called AmigaOS4 or whatever.
Wrong. You can connect it to the CyberstormPPC. That controller is supported.
In the end, it's up to you. If you think that this is asking too much, fine, so be it.
See posts above. I have one but no slot left in the A1. See posts above about speed.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
68k Assembler sources that no one would touch with a ten foot pole unless there is a good reason for it. I don't really think there is.
That is an argument.
Bye, TMTisFree
Edited by TMTisFree on 2007/10/29 20:28:15
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
Have been sold? If that number is "public", then it's wrong.
Even if you replace the 1 before the 3 zero with a number between 1 and 5, the assertion is still correct.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
And SCSI drives have a realy LONG life ... [compared to IDE drives]
Also wrong. The drives and technology is the same, only the electronic on it is different. I have IDE drives running here that are about 8 years old already and in daily use.
Quote:
So ... for BPPC-SCSI user the "cheap IDE" point is nonsens...
Just repeating this over and over will not make it any more true.
Quote:
To say SCSI is nowdays expansive is right ... But this to say to a usergroup that love his exclusive OS [dont Mainstream!] on very expansive [much more if it in relation to the Power he offers to actual other systems] HardWare with the Touch of individualism .. is maybe a little bit wrong ...[from my sense] If the users need "Cheap" .. i dont think Amiga is his option. And SCSI have a big history on Amiga systems ...
Yeah, SCSI has a long history on the Amiga... as do PS/2 memory modules. And I find it hilarious that users complain about prices (of AmigaOS 4.0, of the hardware etc) but then claim that over-expensive server harddrive are "individualism".
I suggest you browse http://www.t10.org/ and then you will 'learn' that a SCSI drive has nothing in common with its IDE counterpart. I will repeat then: I will not downgrad to IDE. What is hilarious is the large number of users complaining about prices in this thread. Or you are mixing things to drown the fish?
No SCSI, no OS4 classic.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
I agree, SCSI is a dead end. Get the elbox ata device, plug in and enjoy.
Note, scsi was good for its time, but like all things we have to move on. The only constants in the universe are death, taxes and Change.
There are other constants dealing with human in this very universe/thread, but I will refrain to note them down right now because this rather subjective matter would cause me an immediate report/abuse/ban or whatever...
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
In the begining i used scsi on my old a4k,then i switched to ide,was good and more sensible hd prices too. More to choose from. Was happy with that.
Fine then. I work with hundred MB of data all day long and I really don't want to cope with an IDE HDD.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
Thats your summary of this thread, which does not mention that you simply dont want to use the existing OS4 CSPPC SCSI driver for your A4kT just because it could ruin your benchmark results when you attach slow SCSI devices? And you did not answer if a switched off(!) SCSI scanner is able to slow down an UWSCSI bus.
Thats your summary of this thread, which does not mention that you simply dont want to use the existing OS4 CSPPC SCSI driver for your A4kT just because it could ruin your benchmark results when you attach slow SCSI devices? And you did not answer if a switched off(!) SCSI scanner is able to slow down an UWSCSI bus.
For the time being, yes. That said, if a driver comes in the future, I might reconsider. Of course, I bought/buy U160/320 SCSI drive just to do benchmarks, lol! It's precisely when I use a scanner that I need a fast HDD. When scanning an A4 page at 600dpi, it's almost 100MB to save on HDD: I'm sure you can understand that a faster disk is a must-have. And my DVD drive is always switched on btw.
Bye, TMTisFree
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." (Napol?on Bonaparte) "I would love to change the world, but they won?t give me the source code." (Unknown)
The driver is for LSI, NCR and Symbios Logic 53Cxxx chips. The PCI SCSI boards with those chips are the cheapest which I could find at www.alternate.de, cheaper than Adaptec (of course not cheaper than a board which you already own). On EBay there also exist lots of such cards, and it looks as if only few buyers are interested in them.
I should have been more specific - Adaptec cards are more common here in Finland. Must be a market thing. Just checked the local Internet auction site - they have half a dozen Adaptec cards on sale (starting from few Euros) but nothing else.
"Ain't Got no cash, Ain't got no style, Ladies vomit when I smile, but does Zoidberg worry?"
I agree, SCSI is a dead end. Get the elbox ata device, plug in and enjoy.
Note, scsi was good for its time, but like all things we have to move on.
This doesnt make any sense. SCSI is a dead end, IDE is a dead end, so what? I find it very funny that someone talks about SCSI as a dead-end in the context of a computer from 1992! To spell it out clearly: It simply doesnt matter!
So the peoples cant use their existing and fast integrated SCSI, but have to buy a slower IDE device from Poland which is a lot of hassle to install? The Fast ATA is a CPU hog, I had stuttering videos with it. The SCSI let's me run everything very smooth, it only takes very little CPU time.
@Grumpy,Chaos,TMTisfree
I agree with you. It is a serious flaw that OS4 doesnt work with SCSI of the BlizzardPPC.
It would be enough if the OS4 devs would only acknowledge this. No OS is perfect. It's ok if some things will be done later. It only seems odd when they praise IDE instead of SCSI.
It only seems odd when they praise IDE instead of SCSI.
It seems you misunderstood me. My exact words were Quote:
the future is IDE/PATA/SATA/USB
Quote:
It is a serious flaw that OS4 doesnt work with SCSI of the BlizzardPPC.
It would be enough if the OS4 devs would only acknowledge this.
I will acknowledge that it is a missing feature. But not a serious flaw. We are talking about FastSCSI2 with 10MB/sec maximum speed here, this is not so much faster than the existing IDE solutions.
Just in case we didnt mention it already, it seems there currently exists no developer who can write that driver, and there exist more reasons for that than only missing interest in SCSI. You can continue to praise SCSI instead of USB2 or FireWire, this may eventually change the opinion of some people about the missing BPPC SCSI driver from "missing driver" to "really missed driver", but this alone is not enough. Did you already ask the BPPC SCSI card manufacturers for the developer docs for the card or the source code of the driver or an OS4 port of the driver? Or did you find existing source code of a driver and a developer who is interested in porting it?
Quote:
No SCSI, no OS4 for me.
No BPPC SCSI driver without somebody who has the docs, the skills, the time and the motivation to write it and the hardware to test it.
I suggest you to use SCSI with the scanner because it's faster than the parallel port, I own an epson GT-7000 and it work great with my AONE, also the transparency unit work well. And an AONE compatible SCSI card it's very cheap.
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
