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