Re: TI-H: Place (ahhh here is what he meant)

Re: TI-H: Place (ahhh here is what he meant)

• To: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
• Subject: Re: TI-H: Place (ahhh here is what he meant)
• From: "Ryan Pogge" <pogge@shore.intercom.net>
• Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 20:11:06 -0500
• Delivered-To: ti-hardware-outgoing@towerguard.unix.edu.sollentuna.se
• Delivered-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org
• Reply-To: ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org

Ok I wayyyy missunderstood what he was saying originaly
about the SCSI being easier as far as the filesystem goes..
here is what he meant:

"SCSI has no advantages over IDE as far as FAT goes.  What I was getting at
in my earlier post is IF someone wanted to store this data on a hard disk
in their own format, this would be easily done with SCSI.  SCSI is not
bound in any way to the whole FAT theorem.  IDE however was developed to
talk FAT... It is possible to create your own format on an IDE drive, but
not very much fun at all.  With SCSI you address the data like you would
memory.  It keeps the layer between FAT and Hardware very separated.  
"

 so thats what I was trying to remember earlier

• Re: TI-H: Place (ahhh here is what he meant)
• From: Grant Stockly <gussie@alaska.net>

• Prev: TI-H: Fw: re:place(who the fuck is this lamer?)
• Next: TI-H: Fw: place
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread