[geeks] scsi notebook drives

[Andrew Weiss]

I think the 040 must have been somewhat of a significant change... the 
050/060's were.

Since... the 030's OS capability ends with 7.5.5.  040's continued with 
7.6,7.6.1, 8.0, and 8.1

Andrew

On Saturday, June 8, 2002, at 03:36 PM, Joshua D Boyd wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:57:08PM -0700, Peter L. Wargo wrote:
>> On Friday, June 7, 2002, at 10:22 PM, Joshua D Boyd wrote:
>>> But, its fine if others think differently.
>>
>> You had to be there.  I remember when it was released, we were all
>> popping big, chubby ones.  Especially the science types, as a 40MHz
>> 68040 with FPU was amazingly fast in 1990 terms.  Most UNIX workstation
>> were still 68030 as well (and lower speed!), the SPARCstation was just
>> really starting to take off, this was damn near the speed of a SPARC 1
>> (10 MIPS .vs. 12.5), and ran Mac apps, of which there were a bunch.
>
> LEM reports that the IIfx was a 68030, albeit one at an insane
> clockrate.  So, this was about the time that the SPARCs were out at
> 25mhz, and the r2k was out at sub-20mhz.
>
>> It was, in fact, Apple's first attempt at a real workstation.  With the
>> right software, it still flies.
>
> Well, I'm not arguing that for a short amount of time it was an
> amazing speed demon.
>
> Just in my book I'd rather try and put Quadra's to real use rather
> than actually use a IIfx due to expensive ram and wierd scsi.
> Personally, I'd love to get a stack of Quadra 950s, and perhaps
> another 840av, when I have more space.  At least one 950 should hold a
> macivoryIII setup, and another should hold an avid avr70 capable
> setup.
>
> BTW, was the 68040 such a minor upgrade that a 40mhz 68030 is faster
> than a 33mhz 68040, because that is the only way I'd think a claim
> that the IIfx was the fastest till the 840av could be supported.
>
> --
> Joshua D. Boyd
> _______________________________________________
> GEEKS:  http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/geeks