[rescue] IDE SSDs? I never knew...

[Mouse]

>> SCSI, also, is an entirely different basket of eggs, as you tend to be reli$

> Though it's extremely common, I don't think it's really reasonable to 
> call [BlueSCSI or ZuluSCSI] "emulators".  They are SCSI mass storage
> devices like any other.

Yes, from the host's point of view.  Not quite, from the admin's.  See
below.

> They don't "emulate" SCSI any more than a Seagate ST15150N does.

True...and false.

While you _do_ have a valid point, I also think there are three
relevant differences from a dedicated disk such as the ST15150N,
differences that make the "emulator" name at least somewhat valid.  As
illogical as it may be, it doesn't feel wrong to me to call ZuluSCSI a
SCSI emulator.  (Okay, _at least_ three; I may have missed some.)

One difference is that they are not specialized custom hardware; the
hardware, while assembled into a custom board, is all off-the-shelf
parts.

Another is that they don't talk directly to the hardware; they speak
some other disk interface protocol, such as SATA, out the other side.

The third is that the firmware is far more easily replaceable by
end-user admins.

It's an interesting gedanken experiment to compare something like
ZuluSCSI to something like the SCSI<->MFM(?) interface boards common
back in the Sun-2 and early Sun-3 days.  I would not call those
"emulators" - I called them "disk interface board"s, IIRC - and I find
myself wondering what the relevant differences are.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B