[geeks] New 2.5" SCSI HDs???

[Mike Meredith]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:07:25 -0500 (EST), der Mouse wrote:
> > Why would there be no SCSI market?  I thought SAS was SCSI...
> 
> Apparently not.  SAS is SCSI the way SATA is IDE, I gather: the
> protocol is more or less the same at the level of command and response
> packets but the underlying transport is totally different and utterly
> incompatible.

Calling SAS SCSI is a bit of double-talk in much the same way that the
SCSI in iSCSI, and the SCSI in FC is. However it is pretty much a done
deal especially as the SCSI standards people deliberately separated
the SCSI command set from the interfaces in the SCSI-3 standard. 

As others have said, SATA is more like SCSI than IDE. The greatest
thing about that is of course all those IDE bigots who all claimed that
SCSI was too complicated and the complexity was completely unnecessary
should now be eating a big slice of humble pie (can I smirk?).

> You cannot, for example, plug a SCSI disk into a SAS system, nor the

Not without a converter at least, but there do exist SATA->SCSI (eh?
can I call it P(arallel) A(ttached) S(csi) ?) converters.

-- 
Mike Meredith (http://zonky.org/)
 ... a software firewall is like bringing a knife to a gunfight.