XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.misc   
   From: nospam@needed.invalid   
      
   On Sat, 10/5/2024 1:01 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:   
   > On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 23:31:46 -0400, "186282@ud0s4.net"   
   > <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 10/3/24 1:13 PM, Rich wrote:   
   >>> In comp.os.linux.misc 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:   
   >>>>    Optical disks - esp M-Disks - can LAST ... but they   
   >>>>    are LOW-DENSITY by today's defs by a BIG margin.   
   >>>>    It's also not clear if you'd be able to FIND a   
   >>>>    DVD reader device 25 years from now. Even most   
   >>>>    current PCs/laptops don't COME with those anymore.   
   >>>   
   >>> Which is exactly the problem.   
   >>>   
   >>> Your DVD 'media' might survive 1,000 years.  But if you can't buy a DVD   
   >>> reader for any price, all that 'media' is useless.   
   >>>   
   >>> We've already seen that issue before.  Try to find a Zip disk or   
   >>> SuperDisk drive.  If any could be purchased, they would all be from   
   >>> places like eBay and of questionable operational quality.   
   >>   
   >>   I actually HAVE a gen-1 ZipDisk - parallel port.   
   >>   They were supposed to be The Future  :-)   
   >>   
   >>   Now nothing even comes with a parallel port.   
   >>   Does anybody sell a USB->DB25 Parallel ?   
   >   
   > I put all by ZipDisks on CD-R, and have a directory on my current   
   > computer with them on it as well.   
   >   
   > I have another computer that still runs, but the monitor died, and i   
   > was unable to replace it. It had an SCSI connection, which was   
   > supposed to be the future. Has anyone seen anything with a SCSI port   
   > recently?   
   >   
   > Computer entropy is real.   
      
   It's called SAS now (Serial Attached SCSI).   
      
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_Attached_SCSI   
      
   The name lives on.   
      
   And it is the same progression as IDE. IDE went from a parallel   
   cable to a serial cable (SATA). SCSI went from a parallel cable   
   to a serial cable (SAS). Generally, the physical layer on SAS   
   is more sophisticated (pre-emphasis, line built out, longer cables,   
   higher amplitude).   
      
   One difference might be, that some of the "novelty" SCSI devices   
   have disappeared. SAS is at least disk drives. But I don't really   
   know what else you can get.   
      
   USB4 will outstrip SAS, but the USB4 will also have a limited   
   cable length (2.6 feet???).   
      
   There is no point of anyone making SCSI parallel controller cards,   
   like Adaptec, if there are no new disk drives with SCSI parallel   
   interfaces shipping. Just as there are no IDE drives now.   
   The largest IDE was 750GB or so. I got my last "spare" IDE DVD from   
   a surplus shop ten minutes from here (after they stopped making   
   IDE DVDs).   
      
   Where the limitation comes in, is finding a SCSI controller chip   
   on a PCI Express card. My collection of SCSI cards here are   
   all PCI. The last machine with a PCI slot is now ten years old.   
   Two of my other machines had motherboard failures, which has   
   really "hollowed out" my redundancy plan. I will soon   
   have nothing current, to use the PCI cards in the junk room.   
   I have a 2906 to run the old scanner, but the old scanner   
   needs some repair work now. I don't know if I have the skill   
   to figure out the root cause. It might be dirty... but I doubt it.   
      
   The "rot" is at multiple levels, not just one level.   
   That's why the "rot" is accelerating. There are fewer things   
   you can depend on. It would be OK perhaps, if only one   
   standard took a shit. When two or three take a shit,   
   now you're talking real money.   
      
      Paul   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)