BlueSCSI Laptop to external WiFi Antenna?

[Phipli]

No. CF cards speak IDE/ATA natively and offer better speeds

Yes. I think I remember suggesting CF to Trash80 before and he had a reason for not wanting it, so I was trying to account for that.

Plus it is easier to get an SD card adapter than buy / find a large industrial CF card for a good price.

Mine has a CF card in it.

 

[luRaichu]

Yep, but as I said, I don't like tying up the external SCSi connector

What else do you need to plug in there?

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

What else do you need to plug in there?

I have vintage scanners, a film scanner and external SCSI HDDs & CDs, including PowerCD. Various peripheral fun and games.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

No. CF cards can speak IDE/ATA natively and offer better speeds

IDE is very marginally faster than the SCSI bus on those machines. Without contention if more than one SCSI peripheral is present, which would be CD in the case in Q630-P6360 et al.. Someone here or there did the benchmarking to prove Primitive IDE implementations were as fast or slightly faster than SCSI. Misguided LEM LORE has IDE "cheapening" the early machines, implying lower performance reflexively.

Such nonsense on LEM included lambasting the PB190 as having only a 16bit CF bus for its NIC as opposed to the Blackbirds onboard setup. NIC on the 'Birds would be the same 16bit interface. The entire "slow 030 I/O bus" of the 'Birds is 16bit as are all other bridged implementations right up thru the 1400.

I use CF/Adapter in my three slot 6400 testbed in the DIGITAL Mini-Tower lashup, works a dream

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

OOPSIE! Meant to make the point that I don't know the response times of SD as opposed to CF or even large file transfer rates. So the above is based upon the my understanding that the storage interface of a machine's I/O setup would be the limiting factor. Am I correct in that assumption?

 

[Phipli]

OOPSIE! Meant to make the point that I don't know the response times of SD as opposed to CF or even large file transfer rates. So the above is based upon the my understanding that the storage interface of a machine's I/O setup would be the limiting factor. Am I correct in that assumption?

I have an IDE SD card adapter in my Pismo and it is much faster than the original hard disk, or the 630 bus, so yes I expect that with a CF or SD adapter, the host would be the main limiting factor. There will probably be some kind of difference, but it won't be the kind of thing that matters, as they'll both out perform the original disk several times over.

One day I might do a proper comparison test in the same machine, but it isn't really a priority. Both work well once you find a combination of parts that works for you (both also have issues when you don't find the right combination of parts).

The third option is to get a DOM (Disk on Module). One... One of my machines has one in it, I think my Pentium 3 BeOS machine.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

The third option is to get a DOM (Disk on Module). One... One of my machines has one in it, I think my Pentium 3 BeOS machine.

I boughtt a pair of teensy PCB mount DOM drives for the two PC166(?) ports on the TEMPOtrio (with USB+FW)headed into my P6360 once the TwinSlot adapter hits the real world. I have just got to learn KiCAD at some point. I could do it on copper perf board, but wanna do it right once I scale the learning curve.



Female, right angle thruhole termination plug's pins point straight up. PCB crosses overtop connector with DOM mounted to underside for plenty of clearance. Should/could be the fastest possible mass storage available. A fast/wide SCSI SD solutioncould be faster? But no room for an UltraSCSI Card for that in this machine. That card heads into the 2UBG3.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Back on topic: might a Pi Zero 2 W on an adapter replace Pico on SD solutions despite overkill and size considerations?

 

[saybur]

Short answer: no. You'd just be reinventing PiSCSI. The current crop of SD based devices are excellent, bus-saturating fast and full of bells and whistles.

 

[Phipli]

Back on topic: might a Pi Zero 2 W on an adapter replace Pico on SD solutions despite overkill and size considerations?

The Pi Zero and Pico aren't just slightly different, they're completely incompatible with each other, it's like the difference between a Mac Mini and a sound card. One is a computer, and one is a component.

It's a terrible comparison, but they are extremely not the same.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Thanks much! Figured that'd be the answer. Hadn't looked at the pinouts to see if the interfaces were even at all close to being compatible. Now I don't need to!

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Short answer: no. You'd just be reinventing PiSCSI. The current crop of SD based devices are excellent, bus-saturating fast and full of bells and whistles.

Indeed, those features would be why I was wondering if the Zero could be adapted to replace Pico on any of those boards.