12 Aug
2012
12 Aug
'12
6:32 p.m.
On 08/12/2012 09:19 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
What's wrong with SAS? SSA I can see a big argument against (and you just
made it), but SAS is solid and interconnects with SATA, as Al pointed out.
I like FibreChannel fine, but SAS seems perfectly decent to me.
I find nothing at all wrong with it. That wasn't my point. My point
was we didn't need it...it's a solution in search of a problem, as we
already had FibreChannel, which can be made every bit as cheap as SAS if
the manufacturers want to do it. We didn't need YET ANOTHER fast serial
transport mechanism for the SCSI protocol.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
There was a perfectly good alternative to ATA/IDE, and
has been for
ages. It's called SCSI. It is, and was at the time SATA was
introduced, a mature, proven technology with a huge installed base.
Absolutely. There are several other notable foibles of that
industry...the very existence of (IBM's proprietary) SSA and SAS, which
are both completely pointless in the face of FibreChannel...they are all
just different physical layers for SCSI.