They have no problem "differentiating" between devices, as in, they work--but the Master drive is what prefaces any speed transfer protocols. I was talking about making the optical drive the MASTER, and a HD the slave, that's what's not good. Unless of course as I stated if the optical drive is UDMA33 and your HD is also an old UDMA33. That's not as bad, but I still don't recommend it because the UDMA33 on an optical device (or whatever its rating) is absolute maximum theoretical xfer rate. It's the same for the HD, but that actual rate you achieve in actual use is going to be faster for the HD. -Clint
God Bless Clint Hamilton, Owner http://OrpheusComputing.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hugh Vandervoort" This is no longer true in modern computers. My Guru says: "Here is your definitive answer. Modern controllers have no problem differentiating between devices in the same channel. Putting a slower optical device on the slave channel of a Ultra 100 device makes no difference in the individual performance curve of either device. However, if you were to copy from say your hard drive, to your burner, then you would be better off putting the hard drive, and the burner on separate channels, of the same controller, so that that data could be read, and written simultaneously. **************************************************************************** *********************************** > No, not good. Your HD's should ALWAYS be the Master. Not > doing so > 'can' slow them down a lot. Ok, thanks Clint but speed is not important. This hard drive is bad and I am just attempting to get a few files off of it. I was just curious if it would work paired with a CD ROM. ============= PCWorks Mailing List ================= Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines & make sure you've followed proper posting procedures, http://pcworkers.com/rules.htm Contact list owner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com =====================================================
