[cctalk] Re: Omnibus to USB - still some boards left!

C'mon, be fair; that _is_ one of its (few) advantages over SCSI: it does not, in practice, need separate terminators. Just because you (and I, and pretty much everybody else sane) consider it far outweighed by other differences for most purposes doesn't mean it's not an advantage. I've seen it said that the spec calls for terminators; even if so, it does not actually need them in practice, so it's a practical advantage. Of course, that's not what the n00bs are *trying to* say, but it _is_ what they *are* saying. Also, SCSI is pretty robust in that regard; if your SCSI bus is as short as your typical IDE cable, I suspect it may not actually need terminators in practice either. I haven't tried that. But I _have_ seen SCSI buses work when triple-terminated; I even saw one kinda-mostly work when quadruple-terminated. Today? No, perhaps not. But, at the time, I'm not convinced it was a wrong choice. Remember what IDE stands for - it was in comparison to disks where the smarts were basically all on the interface card; moving them physically to the drive was a big deal, if only because it meant that every drive had its own copy of them, with all the expense that implied. Note the past tense. Today, the cost of the hardware to implement those smarts is down in the noise. Then, it was significant, and that's part of why I hold the opinion I expounded above. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B