Yeah, I don't get it either. 8.1 does have the Users and Groups control panel though. I assume the concepts of file ownership are embedded in HFS+ even if 8.1 doesn't make use of them. Maybe 8.1 checks for ownership at some low level, even if it lacks an interface to view or change ownership?But 8.1 doesn't have that type of file permissions? Only for network shares. The user can access all files, unless the disk or folder is locked.
Your adapter looks much smaller than mine - it's barely any larger than the SD card, and doesn't have a power connector. Mine is slightly smaller than a regular 2.5 inch drive, but with connectors coming out the top instead of the rear.This is in my 1400, but you can imagine that space is at a premium. This adapter fits just perfectly, and a little foam tape helps secure it.
Thanks, I ordered one of the type that you have. I think the smaller size may solve the practical placement issues I have in the 6300.The disk reader is actually the first photo of the link I had a few posts back about the 1400 drive. They are pretty cheap; I'd suggest one if you think you would use it enough.
I certainly wouldn't be surprised by bugs or poor quality control in the adapter. But I'm also suspicious that the adapter's microcontroller actually tries to read the partition table on the SD card and changes its behavior based on that. I'm not sure why - I don't think that should be necessary. It should be able to query the SD card's capacity by using Secure Digital commands, without ever reading any data sectors from the card. But how else to explain the behavior that I saw? With the screwed-up driver partition (and maybe other partitions?) the adapter consistently reported itself as 32 MB in two different Mac disk utility programs. But as soon as I wiped the SD card using a different computer and replaced it in the adapter, the adapter started correctly reporting the 16 GB size again. I know you've probably moved on from this a long time ago, but if you still care, I would try wiping your SD card (by itself, not with the adapter) in a modern computer and then dropping it back into the IDE-SD adapter.I suppose I could try that on say... an Amiga 4000. I don't have hope for this thing though. I suspect there is a different revision chip or ROM between the two I have. This thing failed miserably at working in a bog standard PC, even after blasting out partition tables and formatting.
Note these are laptop connector size - 2.5" disks, not 3.5". You'll need an adapter. I do find those more reliable though.Thanks, I ordered one of the type that you have. I think the smaller size may solve the practical placement issues I have in the 6300.
It's still worth doing. They're the best of the IDE adapters. I've been running a Pismo with one for about 4 years absolutely reliably. It's actually significantly faster than the stock drive was.Oh poop, I missed that detail. With another adapter and separate power connection it will nullify the space savings that I was hoping for.
I’m sorry! I thought I’d said so…my fault.Oh poop, I missed that detail. With another adapter and separate power connection it will nullify the space savings that I was hoping for.
Are those numbers from Norton? Any idea what's different between the "Disk" and "Publishing Disk" test? The CF card's numbers drop by almost half in that second test (relative to the G3/300 reference system), but still beat everything else by a big margin.Yeah, I have been testing some things in my 6500. For all the excitement people have about SD and SATA adapters in old Macs, I still would rather use CF cards if I can get my hands on them.
That's MacBench. Norton does read / write for a set of sequence lengths.Any idea what's different between the "Disk" and "Publishing Disk" test?
Tried that. Blasted the drive with a USB reader. No dice. Also tried the official SD card formatting tool. Still did the "can't write to device" and randomly showing as 32MB. Got the new adapter, popped the card in and it worked fine.I certainly wouldn't be surprised by bugs or poor quality control in the adapter. But I'm also suspicious that the adapter's microcontroller actually tries to read the partition table on the SD card and changes its behavior based on that. I'm not sure why - I don't think that should be necessary. It should be able to query the SD card's capacity by using Secure Digital commands, without ever reading any data sectors from the card. But how else to explain the behavior that I saw? With the screwed-up driver partition (and maybe other partitions?) the adapter consistently reported itself as 32 MB in two different Mac disk utility programs. But as soon as I wiped the SD card using a different computer and replaced it in the adapter, the adapter started correctly reporting the 16 GB size again. I know you've probably moved on from this a long time ago, but if you still care, I would try wiping your SD card (by itself, not with the adapter) in a modern computer and then dropping it back into the IDE-SD adapter.
Am I right that CF cards are natively IDE/ATA? That would give them an advantage over any SATA or SD card solution where some type of protocol translation is required.
At this point most of my cards are Verbatim and were from Amazon. The painful part these days is the price for anything more than 16GB and that is unfortunate.I tend to find that a new one from Amazon just doesn't work.