[...run eight parallel data pairs...]
The
problem is that in general you can't [as speeds rise, skew and
crosstalk get bad]. That's why we have gone SATA rather than PATA.
Well that
was one of the reasons. ;) ATA/IDE was one of the
worst-designed interconnects in the history of this industry. Even
the PC weeniez knew it had to go. SATA, for all of its faults, is a
godsend!
A godsend...to hardware makers and others who benefit from forced
obsolescence.
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.
I trust you'll forgive a certain amount of cynical belief on my part
that forced incompatbility in both directions of both hosts and disks
was a major part of what drove the imposition of SATA on customers.
That and NIH are the only excuses I can think of for it.
/~\ 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
