Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!zib-berlin.de!irz401!uriah.heep!not-for-mail From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Help with setting up.... Date: 5 Nov 1995 22:54:00 +0100 Organization: Private FreeBSD site, Dresden. Lines: 29 Message-ID: <47jbpo$ldt@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <DHH185.KFs@network.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: uriah.heep.sax.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jeff Henning <jeh@chainsaw.network.com> wrote: >I am currently in the process of buying a tower PC but I am >faced with the decision of going with SCSI or IDE type disks. If i were you, the decision would be clear. :) [*] >I want to install windows 95 on 1 disk and FreeBSD on a second >disk and be able to boot from either. This is not a problem with >SCSI but it is considerably more expensive than IDE. Does anyone SCSI is not necessarily *that* much more expensive. You have to compare apples with apples however (i.e., don't compare a crappy IDE drive with a high-end SCSI one). Use an NCR 53c810 SCSI controller. They are quite cheap, even compared to the better parts of the EIDE crap (i think you can get'em around $70 or so), this will level down the slightly higher price of the SCSI disk. Of course, i don't have the slightest idea how good Win95 might be with the NCR conroller. FreeBSD runs fine, to the least. Since you're going to get two disks anyway, you are also free to use an IDE one for Win95, and a SCSI drive for FreeBSD. [*] I would go SCSI. And i would put Win95 into the bit-bucket. :-) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)