Adaptec 39160: Drivers for Vista or Server 2008 (and Windows 7)? Also motherboard upgrade
Andrew Hamilton
Windows 2008 Server. Nor Windows 7 (beta).
Are there any built-in drivers in any of these OSes? For either 32-bit
or 64-bit versions? Or, do I need to replace this card if I migrate
my system?
This isn't just an adapter question. I'm planning to upgrade my
system with an ASUS P6T motherboard probably around June. There are
several versions of this board with and without PCI-X slots. Depending
on the answer to this question, I would choose the appropriate version
of this board.
daytripper
wrote:
I'd be very surprised if virtually every adapter Adaptec has ever sold is
*not* supported on those operating systems, but one way to be sure is to dig
into the HCL...
Andrew Hamilton
Thanks. In general, I liked the HCL list, since I could look up my MF
printer/scanner/copier and several printers and scanners. But, but,
but there were very few Adaptec products listed and there was no
category for storage adapters or SCSI.
Robert Heller
If the 39160 is yet another member of the AIC-7xxx family of chips (and
I am pretty sure it is), the stock AIC-7xxx driver should work. Almost
all of the Adaptec 2940, 29160, 39160, and various integreted PCI SCSI
controller chips use some flavor of AIC-7xxx chipset. Since Adaptec
*publshes* the tech spec for these chips, there is probably a built-in
driver on the O/S distro disk of virtually every 32 and 64 bit O/S.
>
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows
hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
Michael Baeuerle
>
> If the 39160 is yet another member of the AIC-7xxx family of chips (and
> I am pretty sure it is), the stock AIC-7xxx driver should work.
Ack, the documentation of the Linux "aic7xxx" driver say:
| Controller Chip Host-Bus Int-Connectors Ext-Connectors
Notes
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| ...
| AHA-39160 aic7899 PCI/64-66 2 X LVD-HD68F 2 X LVD-VHD68F
| LVD-50M
Looks like the AIC7899 is the last chip from the "old generation"
(AIC77xx / AIC78xx).
> Almost
> all of the Adaptec 2940, 29160, 39160, and various integreted PCI SCSI
> controller chips use some flavor of AIC-7xxx chipset. Since Adaptec
> *publshes* the tech spec for these chips, there is probably a built-in
> driver on the O/S distro disk of virtually every 32 and 64 bit O/S.
Up to the AIC78xx chips, the newer AIC79xx chips seem to be different
(require different drivers).
Micha
Robert Heller
My 2.6.9-67.0.22.EL (CentOS 4.7 / RHEL 4.7) kernel does include a driver
for the AIC79xx chips:
sauron.deepsoft.com% ls /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/
aic79xx.ko* aic7xxx.ko*
It appears the AIC-77xx (EISA) and AIC-78xx (PCI) are the Fast through
U160 chips and the AIC-79xx (PCI-X) are U320 chips.
So under Linux all of the aic-7xxx chips are supported. I'd be
supprised if the MS-Windows Vista installer disk did NOT include some
sort of driver for the 39160 board. I don't think *anyone* needs to
bother going to the Adaptec site for drivers for these common board
types and I suspect Adaptec no longer bothers to build their own drivers
-- they just publish the device specs and the O/S support people just
write (or patch) drivers to support the newer boards as they come out.
>
>
> Micha
Andrew Hamilton
<hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
>sort of driver for the 39160 board. I don't think *anyone* needs to
>bother going to the Adaptec site for drivers for these common board
>types and I suspect Adaptec no longer bothers to build their own drivers
>-- they just publish the device specs and the O/S support people just
>write (or patch) drivers to support the newer boards as they come out.
>
That's nice IF you are the market leader in a given category, e.g.
Adaptec. But what if are a minor player? MS can't possibly write
drivers for every SCSI card eve made. And they don't.
For me, as a consumer, it's an argument in favor of Adaptec or maybe
an LSI-Logic-based card.
-AH
daytripper
wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:08:44 -0600, Robert Heller
Well sure it is. And it's not obvious if you have a complaint or not ;-)
Bottom line is one rarely if ever needs to go to Adaptec to find drivers for
MS operating systems. Sure, the fact that Adaptec was very successful
marketing their product line for decades couldn't have hurt - and there's also
a good possibility that Adaptec provided funding and/or other assistance to
help it happen.
If the playing field isn't level for all teams, so what? That's business.
Just ask the DEC Alpha team, or the MIPS developers...
Cydrome Leader
These days, you really don't have much of a choice. There are no longer
dozens of SCSI card vendors and chipset makers.
As you mentioned, your choices are Adaptec or LSI- it makes things pretty
easy.
Andrew Hamilton
<pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>> For me, as a consumer, it's an argument in favor of Adaptec or maybe
>> an LSI-Logic-based card.
To reply to an earlier post, I'm not really, really complaining. it's
just that I like markets with vigorous competition. The prime example
of a market without such is the PC OS market, and we all know how that
has turned out. And as "exhibit B," there is the market for "office
productivity suites."
>
>These days, you really don't have much of a choice. There are no longer
>dozens of SCSI card vendors and chipset makers.
>
>As you mentioned, your choices are Adaptec or LSI- it makes things pretty
>easy.
It means if you pick one of those two, you may pay a bit more upfront,
but you get a longer life out of the system containing that card.
-AH
Andrew Hamilton
<day_t...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
>If the playing field isn't level for all teams, so what? That's business.
>Just ask the DEC Alpha team, or the MIPS developers...
That is SO TRUE.
-AH
Cydrome Leader
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 03:40:08 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
> <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> For me, as a consumer, it's an argument in favor of Adaptec or maybe
>>> an LSI-Logic-based card.
>
> To reply to an earlier post, I'm not really, really complaining. it's
> just that I like markets with vigorous competition. The prime example
> of a market without such is the PC OS market, and we all know how that
> has turned out. And as "exhibit B," there is the market for "office
> productivity suites."
Well, I've not seen anybody come up with a desktop OS that can even touch
windows. I'd try something else, but nobody can come up with anything
decent.
>>These days, you really don't have much of a choice. There are no longer
>>dozens of SCSI card vendors and chipset makers.
>>
>>As you mentioned, your choices are Adaptec or LSI- it makes things pretty
>>easy.
>
> It means if you pick one of those two, you may pay a bit more upfront,
> but you get a longer life out of the system containing that card.
>
> -AH
A third player in chipsets for SCSI might be nice as it might drop prices
a bit, even though they're not that awful anymore.
Eric Gisin
news:ool4o4lb5ff88aqtm...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:08:44 -0600, Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>sort of driver for the 39160 board. I don't think *anyone* needs to
>>bother going to the Adaptec site for drivers for these common board
>>types and I suspect Adaptec no longer bothers to build their own drivers
>>-- they just publish the device specs and the O/S support people just
>>write (or patch) drivers to support the newer boards as they come out.
>
> That's nice IF you are the market leader in a given category, e.g.
> Adaptec. But what if are a minor player? MS can't possibly write
> drivers for every SCSI card eve made. And they don't.
>
MS write drivers for legacy and open-standard devices like ATA/SATA, USB, and PCI.
I know this because the NT4 DDK contains many sample drivers.
meaje
Cydrome Leader;926758 Wrote:
> Andrew Hamilton <Ahamilt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 03:40:08 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
> > <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Well, I've not seen anybody come up with a desktop OS that can even
> >touch windows. I'd try something else, but nobody can come up with
> >anything decent.
Why haven't you tried the Linux RedHat OS's (CentOS, Fedora Core,
WhiteBox, ...), or the Debian OS's (Debian, Ubuntu, Knopix, ...). These
OS's are very mature and have almost no reasons not to be in use on the
desktop. Web Browsing is using a mature Mozilla product commonly known
as Firefox most current versions of Linux are using Firefox 3.x.
Document Creation / Edditing is again mature with the use of Open Office
(formerly known as Star Office by Sun Microsystems) with the current
versions using the 3.x versions of Open Office which by most accounting
gives a good run for the money against MS Office. Development can be
done in the Linux Unix world with a great tool known as Eclipse.
Eclipse is a great tool for development and can be used for almost
anything from Web Sites to C++, or Java programming. The only thing I
can think of that would hold me back from switching ALL of my computers
over to Linux / Unix is the little problem of playing games. In this
arena MS has done a great job with technologies like DirectX and
mantaining contacts with the game software developers. But if you have
an older PC that you want to make into a great Web Browser or Document
Editor, check out Fedora, or CentOS for a great Free OS that in a lot of
ways gives even Vista a run for it's money.
--
Jeff Means
:)