What is holding up ATA100?

addisonaddison
Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
We all know that current processors cannot make proper use of DDR ram so we are stuck with PC133 for the time being. But why oh why do we still have no support for ATA100. Top end PC's are starting to support ATA133? :confused: :confused: <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 4
    the swanthe swan Posts: 82member
    Most likely the fact that no one needs it. I don't know of any IDE drives with sustained rates above 40MB/sec.
  • Reply 2 of 4
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    That is true, but peak reads actually would benefit, at least from ATA-100.

    Also the new 120 and 160GB drives aparently only run on ATA-100 or better controllers.

    But maybe Apple has a special breed of ATA-66 controllers who can work with those drives too. Yet I don't see them as BTO.



    Aparently Apple more and more thinks they don't need to give us the best, just so much that some will buy a new machine. That's sad.



    G-News
  • Reply 3 of 4
    the swanthe swan Posts: 82member
    120GB drives should be backward compatible. 160GB drives exceed the 137GB ATA standards and need newer controllers, but enhancements to support larger drives could as easily be incorporated into ATA-66 controllers as they could into ATA-133 controllers.



    No, what's sad is you seem to miss the point that changing the ATA support would require changing the chipset. Its silly to do this for something as insigificant and marginally necessary as ATA-133 support. Apple will incorporate ATA-133 at the next major motherboard revision.



    [ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: The Swan ]</p>
  • Reply 4 of 4
    g-newsg-news Posts: 1,107member
    I'm not saying that they should have made it with the Macs released yesterday, certainly not.

    But the transition from Sawtooth to "Digital Audio" already required a mobo revision, adding an ATA-100 chip would have been little trouble.



    And I sure HOPE we'll see ATA-133 in the next revision. Would be a ****ing joke it it wasn't.



    G-news
Sign In or Register to comment.