Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!well!msudoc!edstb!ahxenix!bob
From: bob@ahxenix.REL.COM (Bob Leffler)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: using two AT hard disk controllers...
Message-ID: <300@ahxenix.REL.COM>
Date: Sat, 10-Jan-87 16:52:24 EST
Article-I.D.: ahxenix.300
Posted: Sat Jan 10 16:52:24 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 11-Jan-87 09:38:16 EST
References: <488@spdcc.UUCP>
Organization: Auburn Hills Xenix BBS
Lines: 15
Keywords: RTs do it, why not ATs?
Summary: interupts on the AT
Xref: mnetor comp.unix.xenix:48 comp.sys.ibm.pc:903

In article <488@spdcc.UUCP>, dyer@spdcc.UUCP writes:
> I note that the RT PC can use two PC/AT hard/floppy disk controllers provided
> their jumper settings are different.   Is there any reason why the AT
> too expensive.  Are there problems with allocating interrupts on the AT?

That would be my initial impression.  I'm not that familar with the AT.  I
jumped from the XT environment directly to the RT.

Has anyone had any experience with the RT's SCSI interface?  How well does
it perform?

-- 
Bob Leffler  -  bob@ahxenix.REL.COM
            
  ...!ihnp4!mb2c!edsdrd!ahxenix!bob