| I installed a ST-277N just a few months ago. All I needed was
the drive, the Controller (HardFrame), the ribbon cable, and
mounting screws. (And of course a screwdriver :^)
The drive didn't come with anything else. The controller manufacturer
supplied the other small amount of hardware required.
What is the "host adapter"? What SCSI machine/controllers require
that?
Steve
|
| I ordered a ST296N drive, and the company I ordered it from sent
me a ST-01 adapter. I also have a Microbotics Hardframe and as
a result I did not have any use for it. I assume that
it must be used to bridge ST-506 to SCSI. I was not really given
the option to not buy it, and since it was only $13.50, I did not
sent it back, figuring that I could probably sell it at some local
computer or Ham swap fest.
|
|
I found this in one of the Atari ST electronic magazines (either
streport or stzmag, can't rememeber which one), it concerns
the ST296N speed/interleave. Strange but true?? Comments?
/*/ A STORY ABOUT SEAGATE /*/
=====================
by Peter Szymonik
Across my travels on UseNet last week I ran into Kevin Callahan of the
University of Washington. Kevin was working with his local ST dealer in
assembling a hard drive for his system and was seeking advice. Since I
had just finished putting together a 100meg system myself and was packed
with all the latest hard drive information, I was more than eager to help
out a fellow 'home-brewer' and ST owner.
When I first heard Kevin's plight, I didn't realize the full implications
of his story. As I considered what his tale had in store for future hard
drive buyers (both mechanisms and assembled units) I became very concerned
and decided to get the word out.
After doing some research, Kevin bought a Seagate ST-296N SCSI drive
mechanism from Hard Drives International, a well known hard drive mail
order firm that advertises heavily in Computer Shopper. Kevin chose the
ST-296N because it was rated and advertised as having 85megs of storage
and a fast seek rate of 28ms and a 10Mbit transfer rate when formatted at
1:1. The hard drive was assembled by the dealer's technician and at his
local dealer.
When he went to pick up his new drive Kevin was told that the drive was
formatted at 1:1 even though it had ROM8. Huh? The horror story begins.
Using ICD's HD Rate program which the technician had just downloaded from
GEnie, they watched the program return a rating for Kevin's drive of 24ms
and 57Kps (yes, that's *57*.) Kevin and the technician weren't really
sure what the numbers meant, but the technician assured Kevin that the
drive was fine.
Kevin brought the drive home and filled the drive with 25megs worth of
storage. He called friend who owned a new Seagate 277N, also from the
same dealer, and told him the story. His friend said that his drive was
formatted at 2:1 by the dealer and that it ran at a rate of 35ms and
321Kps. Doing some experimenting, they re-formatted the friend'd drive at
1:1 and lo and behold, the drive now ran at a blazing 35ms and 552Kps! So
what was the problem with Kevin's drive??
Undaunted and not willing to accept the results Kevin posted a few
messages on UseNet asking the advice of other people who had assembled
hard drives with Seagate mechanisms. He was tipped off that something was
very wrong when he received a letter from someone who had also just
purchased a new ST-296N. This fellow was getting 28ms and 407Kps at a 2:1
interleave and when he tried to re-format at 1:1, like Kevin he got the
dismal rating of 21ms and 51Kps!
After making numerous phone calls to both Hard Drives International and
Seagate Technology, he discovered that Seagate was now shipping drives
with two different ROM sets, these begin labelled ROM7 and ROM8. What's
the difference?
Its turns out the Seagate was having a problem with MAC computers systems
and their new line of hard drives. MAC computers apparently can't handle
the very fast data transfer rates that the new Seagate drives were capable
of. Seagate's solution was to change the ROM set on the hard drive
mechanisms from the faster ROM7 to a much slower ROM8.
While ROM7 allows the drive mechanism to run at its fastest data transfer
rate and allows the drive to be formatted at a 1:1 interleave, ROM8
requires that the drive mechanism be formatted at a 2:1 interleave and
results in a much slower data transfer rate than the mechanism is capable
of!
The Seagate technician Kevin spoke to on the phone told him that he would
not notice the difference in the interleave, (wrong), and that all Seagate
drive mechanisms can be formatted at 1:1, and went on further to say that
a data transfer rate of 200Kps for a SCSI drive is a 'good and normal
rate'!!
For comparison, my old Supra 30meg drive ran at a data transfer rate of
350Kps and my new Seagate 157N drives run at a rate of 550Kps (completely
different ROM set.) ICD has also stated that drives which run at a data
transfer rate slower than 300Kps would make a tape backup unit unusable
because a transfer rate slower than 300Kps would make back-ups take an
enormous amount of time.
The obvious solution to this mess would be to specifically order ROM8 when
buying a new Seagate hard drive mechanism, or an assembled hard drive unit
which uses the Seagate mechanisms, (such as ICD's or ABCO's line of
drives.) Trouble is that few people are even aware that the different
ROMs exist and worse still, Hard Drives International claims that there is
no way for them to guarantee which ROM set comes with a drive ordered from
them!
In trying to locate a replacement drive with the ROM8, Kevin was given a
run-around and finally told that ROM7 drives were now very hard to find,
and that Seagate is currently shipping mostly if not ** ALL ** of their
drives with the newer and slower ROM8!
To make matters worse, it is impossible to simply order the ROM7 and
replace the current ROM8, since the problem has been masked into several
chips and a simple 'pop chip-put chip in fix wouldn't do the trick.
The implications of this is tremendous. The ST is a screamer when it
comes to hard drive data transfer rates, and now it appears that the
largest manufacturer of hard drive mechanisms in the United States has
altered their drives to run at rates slower than we are able to handle,
simply to please the MAC community!
At least three ST hard drive manufacturers use Seagate drives exclusively
and I have to wonder if they are aware of what is going on. Seagate
drives are also often the drive of choice for home-brew drive units
because of their low cost and reliable performance.
Seagate's action requires a LOUD response from ST and Amiga hard drive
owners and buyers. There is no reason why we should suffer as a community
simply to please Mac computer owners who unfortunately decided spend their
cash, (and lots of it) on a computer that isn't capable of handling the
data transfer rates offered by Seagate's new state-of-the-art hard drive
mechanisms.
[This article written and posted with permission from Kevin Callahan. His
dealer has been informed of the problem and the technician there has been
on the phone with Seagate to complain and try to remedy the situation.
In the meantime Kevin is still working off floppies.]
|
| re: -.1
Yep, there is and I'm sure you know it and own it. :-)
It's Diskperf(a) found first on Fish#48 and in new version on an
Fish above #170 (forget the exact nimber right now).
The first version leaves a lock on the drive you tested, so you
have to re-boot or re-format that drive to get rid of that directory,
but it's faster (read: it doen't do as much tests) and will work
with less RAM and free disk space.
The new one should only be used if you have lotsa time and space
on your HD and RAM.
- <CB>
|