Adaptec SCSI and OS/2
Bill Chin
last night. To my dismay, the drivers were for OS/2 1.1, dated
1989!!! Figuring that the packaging was old, and there would
be newer drivers on their BBS, I called their BBS long distance.
The drivers I have turn out to be the latest they have. Due
to some delays as Microsoft, they haven't been able to release
them and are talking about a June release date, according
to the sysop in some messages that I scrolled through. So those
of you that had hoped to have HPFS running on an Adaptec right
now will be dissappointed. I got the Adaptec partially
because of the driver support :-( not thinking that I would
have to question what version of OS/2 it supported.
My question is thus: is this an Adaptec problem, or is it
an IBM/MS OS/2 driver support problem? The sysop hinted
that they were waiting for MS to release a standard SCSI
interface (shades of Advanced SCSI Programming Interface (ASPI))
?? Are there other SCSI boards out there that support OS/2 1.3?
Is June a realistic date?? Should I return the Adaptec and go
to Future Domain, WD, etc. for better support?
I have no problems with the hardware... it seems to coexist
just fine with my MFM HD/FD controller, and it functions
under DOS/Windows w/o problems. I also liked the amount
of technical info they gave in their manuals, including
a quick install guide.
--
Bill Chin internet:bc...@umd5.umd.edu
PC/IP, Computer Science Center NeXTmail:bc...@is-next.umd.edu
University of Maryland, CompuServe:74130,2714
College Park *Standard Disclaimers Apply*
David Feustel
Think IDE drives instead.
--
David Feustel, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805, (219) 482-9631
EMAIL: netcom.com
Bill Chin
>I strongly recommend forgetting SCSI if you want to run OS/2.
>Think IDE drives instead.
Wait a minute here... There are very strong reasons to go to SCSI...
IBM itself has gone from ESDI to SCSI (their new 80s, 90s, & 95s),
as well as a large part of the computing world (Sun, Dec, Apple, NeXT).
Beyond the technical and user advantages of using SCSI over IDE,
such as daisy chaining 7 devices, high speed, flexibility of
using the bus for more than just hard drives, and more,
SCSI is a major standard. For OS/2 to ignore it is to shoot
itself in its foot. SCSI has *major* advantages in multi-platform
environments, or where a number of devices need to be hooked up
to a machine.
Anyways, it seems that the reason Adaptec hasn't updated its
drivers is because its waiting for Microsoft to finalize some
things. I believe that they didn't just write a driver for the
Adaptec line, but implemented the ASPI (Advanced SCSI Programming
Interface), thus causing the delays. So for now, I'm using
1.1 drivers w/ FAT partitions. And I had just gotten used
to HPFS too. :-)
--
Bill Chin internet:bc...@umd5.umd.edu
PC/IP, Computer Science Center NeXTmail:bc...@is-next.umd.edu
U-Maryland, College Park *Standard Disclaimers Apply*
Larry Salomon, Jr.
>
>I strongly recommend forgetting SCSI if you want to run OS/2.
>Think IDE drives instead.
Any particular reason? We have a model 90 with SCSI drive running 1.3
and used as a LAN server and we have gotten excellent performance from
it (the hard disk is rather small, but I will be receiving 2 Seagate
Wren VII 1G SCSI drives, so I'll be reporting on those when we've had a
chance to play with them for a bit).
Cheers,
Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q') LAR...@YKTVMV.BITNET
OS/2 Applications and Tools lar...@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center lar...@eng.clemson.edu
Yorktown Heights, NY
Disclaimer: The statements and/or opinions stated above are strictly my
own and do not reflect the views of my employer. Additionally, I have a
reputation for being obnoxious, so don't take any personal attacks too
seriously.
Wim Bonner
>it (the hard disk is rather small, but I will be receiving 2 Seagate
>Wren VII 1G SCSI drives, so I'll be reporting on those when we've had a
>chance to play with them for a bit).
Wow. Must be nice to have space....
I've been wondering if anyone has a SCSI system hooked up on a machine that
does what I'd really like when I get some money:
One SCSI Host adapter, (Meanining it only takes up one SLOT)
One SCSI Tape Backup,
One SCSI CDrom Drive, (Or more)
One SCSI Hard drive, (OR more)
(Are there any SCSI scanners available out there?)
And most importantly, if this would be accessable under OS/2.
Wim.
--
| wbo...@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu | The Loft BBS
| 2731...@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu | (509)335-4339
| 72561...@CompuServe.com | USR HST Dual Standard HST/V.32
David Feustel
interested in OS/2, forget SCSI for at least a year. IDE drives are
automatically supported by each new release of OS/2. Sadly, such is
not the case with SCSI.
J.A. Nedelka
>Think IDE drives instead.
>--
for mutitasking systems. My rapidly aging memory doesn't help me much
here, but I seem to recall that the engineering behind SCSI made it more
appropriate for Unix or OS/2. I'll have to see if I can find where I
read that...
--
Jan A. Nedelka / "So much for true love!"
The Fourth Doctor / ---Ursula, the Sea Witch
Arnold J. Rimmer / "I'm not finished..."
jan...@ultb.isc.rit.edu / ---Edward Scissorhands
Colin Longman
Since IBM took control over for 1.3 (and subsequently 2.0), I think that they would have designed it to work with their own machines.
JP Koivisto
There's also a 300MB SCSI-disk & 150MB streamer. We also had
a Sun386i which was unused - I tried the 300MB disk from Sun386i
and put in it as a second drive AND IT WORKED (without even formatting),
too bad I couldn't keep it!
(In fact we also tried the SIMMs from the Sun386i AND THEY WORKED, too!
I wonder if the 80387 from the Sun386i....)
I've had it ever since October 1989 and I got DOS 4.01 & OS/2 1.1
with it when I got it! Both worked fine etc...
End of last year I got an upgrade of OS/2 to 1.21 and it still works.
I work at "Nokia Data" in Finland. That used to be "Nokia Data Systems"
but end of last year the production & marketing/selling where split
and "Nokia Data Systems" is the one making the machines/systems.
(I hope I've got it at least basicly right).
The point is, this european company (based in Stockholm, Sweden) is
fairly big and they make their own machines.
The DOS AND OS/2 versions are also 'Nokia' versions, ie. they have
been fitted for these machines.
The version of OS/2 I'm using says something like this on bootup
(I took the strings from 'OS2LDR' & 'DISKN1.SYS' with 'strings'
command as they usually flash by too quick to really memorize
them. I'm 99% sure these are just what I see when booting...):
Microsoft Operating System/2 Version 1.21
(C) Copyright Microsoft Corp. 1981-1990. All rights reserved.
Nokia Data Systems OS/2 Revision 1.21B
(C) Copyright Nokia Data Systems AB 1990
SCSI Manager 1.2 / 1990-10-12 by Nokia Data Systems AB installed
I'm not sure what is the truth, but I seem to recall that the
1542-driver has been 'made' HERE, either from scratch (which I doubt)
or at least by licensing some source from Adaptec!
THIS PURELY MY GUESS, based on some rumours...
The DISKN1.SYS also contains the string 'SCSIMGR$' which I saw also in a
version of 'ASPI4OS2.SYS' which was supposed to be loaded when running
SYTOS. However, the 'ASPI4OS2' ain't needed with Nokia's OS/2!
(Hmm, I think version 1.1 of Nokia OS/2 DID need some special driver
when using the streamer)
SO, AN OS/2 DRIVER FOR Adaptec 1542A IS NOT A MYTH.
IT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED FOR A YEAR NOW!
By the way, the same OS/2 can be used on a 'old' AT (MAD Technologies
10Mhz 286, with ordinary 70MB Micropolis disk). You don't need the
DISKN1.SYS then, it uses DISK01.SYS in that case!
jpk - JP Koivisto, Nokia Data OY, Helsinki, Finland
---
EMail: j...@davasun.data.nokia.fi
Discl.: My opinions, my experiences, might not be facts!
Barry King
> I recommend SCSI (Adaptec) highly to UNIX users. I repeat: if you're
> interested in OS/2, forget SCSI for at least a year. IDE drives are
> automatically supported by each new release of OS/2. Sadly, such is
> not the case with SCSI.
> --
There are other ways to go. If you don't need more than 2 SCSI devices
you can use a DPT SmartConnex HBA (comes in ISA/EIASA and cahceing
versions of each) which emulates a WD-1003x controller. Excellent
performer. Word has it that DPT is soon to release OS/2 SCSI drivers
also. We're using Adaptec HBA's in MCA Lan Server machines running OS/2
v1.2 (non-HPFS) and things work fine. No HPFS though...
Anyway, if people need/want to get into SCSI now, there are alternatives.
The DPT boards are top notch and are great performers.
Barry King ersys!bk...@nro.cs.athabascau.ca
Edmonton Remote Systems: Serving Northern Alberta since 1982
ts...@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
> Wow. Must be nice to have space....
>
> I've been wondering if anyone has a SCSI system hooked up on a machine that
> does what I'd really like when I get some money:
>
> One SCSI Host adapter, (Meanining it only takes up one SLOT)
> One SCSI Tape Backup,
> One SCSI CDrom Drive, (Or more)
> One SCSI Hard drive, (OR more)
> (Are there any SCSI scanners available out there?)
>
> And most importantly, if this would be accessable under OS/2.
>
> Wim.
> --
> | wbo...@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu | The Loft BBS
> | 2731...@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu | (509)335-4339
> | 72561...@CompuServe.com | USR HST Dual Standard HST/V.32
With our IBM rep, we successfully connected one CD ROM drive, two HD's, and a
45 meg removable drive to our model 80 with IBM's 32 bit SCSI adapter.
We currently have two CD ROM drives and the 45 meg removable shared out over
the network.
tim shea
Internatioal IS&DP
3M, Inc.
David Feustel
SCSI running on PS/2 machines. That's not what I call adequate OS/2
support for SCSI.
scott e garfinkle
>I've been wondering if anyone has a SCSI system hooked up on a machine that
>does what I'd really like when I get some money:
>
>One SCSI Host adapter, (Meanining it only takes up one SLOT)
>One SCSI Tape Backup,
>One SCSI CDrom Drive, (Or more)
>One SCSI Hard drive, (OR more)
I have the Adaptec 1542b, an Archive 2150S tape drive, and a Microplolis 330mb
hard disk running OS/2 1.21 (using the Adaptec 1.1 drivers). No CD Rom yet,
though that should not be a problem, as the Adaptec board seems pretty much
to be the standard for such things. As many people have pointed out,
it remains to be seen whether I will be able to use OS/2 2.0 on this machine.
Oh, the rest of the machine is an Everex Viewpoint VGA (nice 800x600 or
1024x768 interlaced PM drivers) and a Multisync 3D on a 386/20 with 8mb mem.
-scott garfinkle
Bill Campbell
:I recommend SCSI (Adaptec) highly to UNIX users. I repeat: if you're
I still haven't figured out why anyone would want an operating
system divided by 2 (OS/2). Ignorance seems the only excuse.
--
INTERNET: bi...@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP: ...!thebes!camco!bill 6641 East Mercer Way
uunet!camco!bill Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
Guy Dille
<1991Apr26....@serval.net.wsu.edu>
Sender:
Reply-To: gdi...@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Guy Dille)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA
Keywords:
In article <1991Apr26....@serval.net.wsu.edu>
wbo...@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu (Wim Bonner) writes:
>In article <1991Apr26....@watson.ibm.com> larrys@yktvmv writes:
>>it (the hard disk is rather small, but I will be receiving 2 Seagate
>>Wren VII 1G SCSI drives, so I'll be reporting on those when we've had a
>>chance to play with them for a bit).
>
>Wow. Must be nice to have space....
>
>I've been wondering if anyone has a SCSI system hooked up on a machine that
>does what I'd really like when I get some money:
>
>One SCSI Host adapter, (Meanining it only takes up one SLOT)
>One SCSI Tape Backup,
>One SCSI CDrom Drive, (Or more)
>One SCSI Hard drive, (OR more)
>(Are there any SCSI scanners available out there?)
>
>And most importantly, if this would be accessable under OS/2.
>
If that is what you want buy an NCR PC and OS/2 1.21 from NCR....The final
version of OS/2 1.21 from MS and others (NCR, etc.) contain SCSI drivers for
disks, CD ROM's, Tape drives and printers...check it out! (You don't think I'm
biased because I work for NCR do you?!?!?!)
Guy B. Dille - NCR E&M Atlanta, Retail Systems Division
--
Jeff MCDOUGALL
> I recommend SCSI (Adaptec) highly to UNIX users. I repeat: if you're
> interested in OS/2, forget SCSI for at least a year. IDE drives are
> automatically supported by each new release of OS/2. Sadly, such is
> not the case with SCSI.
> --
Not yet, anyway. But it's definitely closer than one year.
David Feustel
when I can use it on my (nonIBM) ISA 386 with my adaptec 1542a
controller. Everybody lies when they promise SCSI support for OS/2
"real soon now". OBTW: How about the OS/2 CDROM support that Microsoft
promised for a year ago last January?
Andy Cress
>does what I'd really like when I get some money:
>
>One SCSI Host adapter, (Meanining it only takes up one SLOT)
>One SCSI Tape Backup,
>One SCSI CDrom Drive, (Or more)
>One SCSI Hard drive, (OR more)
>(Are there any SCSI scanners available out there?)
>
>And most importantly, if this would be accessable under OS/2.
>
>Wim.
>--
>| wbo...@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu | The Loft BBS
>| 2731...@wsuvm1.csc.wsu.edu | (509)335-4339
>| 72561...@CompuServe.com | USR HST Dual Standard HST/V.32
Other vendors may have solutions also, but you should definitely
check out NCR SCSI (we wrote the book on SCSI). For example
an normal server for our new COOPERATION product line will look
like this:
NCR 486/33 MHz (comes with a SCSI adapter)
NCR OS/2, NCR LANMAN 2.0, ....
SCSI devices:
NCR 6091 CDROM Drive
NCR 2.2 Gb Tape unit (tapes cost $7 from WalMart)
Hard disk storage from 1 to 10 Gb (using disk arrays)
We have one set up here, it's fast. This may not be an impartial
plug, but judge for yourself, ask to see a demo.
Call 1-800-CALL-NCR for more information.
----
Andy Cress acr...@oiscola.Columbia.NCR.COM
[Insert standard disclaimer here]
Sunil Gangwani
I am one of the frustrated OS/2 device developers struggling with the
incomplete documentation, buggy debug kernel supplied by Microsoft.
They have the lousiest support for developers & all I can say is that
OS/2, Microsoft, their DDK (device driver development kit) sucks.
Microsoft are you listening? Better go for Unix than their proprietary
OS/2. If you look around you will find a Unix that supports multiple DOS
sessions, multi-threaded, X-window support, public domain utilities, etc
Even their non-standard Presentation Manager sucks.
If anyone cares to reply, do so to gang...@andromeda.rutgers.edu
Gangwani. D
Jeff MCDOUGALL
> I'll believe that any given (current) version of OS/2 supports SCSI
> when I can use it on my (nonIBM) ISA 386 with my adaptec 1542a
> controller. Everybody lies when they promise SCSI support for OS/2
> "real soon now". OBTW: How about the OS/2 CDROM support that Microsoft
> promised for a year ago last January?
>
"Everybody lies" is a bit strong, don't you think? How and when exactly
were you lied to? How long have you been waiting for SCSI support in OS/2?
jeff mcdougall
microsoft
lar...@watson.ibm.com
>I am one of the frustrated OS/2 device developers struggling with the
>incomplete documentation, buggy debug kernel supplied by Microsoft.
>They have the lousiest support for developers & all I can say is that
>OS/2, Microsoft, their DDK (device driver development kit) sucks.
>Microsoft are you listening? Better go for Unix than their proprietary
> OS/2. If you look around you will find a Unix that supports multiple DOS
>sessions, multi-threaded, X-window support, public domain utilities, etc
>
>Even their non-standard Presentation Manager sucks.
Oh boy...Having writing over 40,000 lines of PM code (in C), I can relate
to what you are saying (I have run into some nasty snags in my career).
However, don't let your emotions get the best of you.
Remember, the newsgroup can be your best friend. Ask questions. Ask
LOTS of questions. If we don't know the answer, it can be found.
Of course, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. Your post sounds
like you're another "Unix puke", and if I had half a mind (and my morning
cup of coffee), I'd nuke you, like I did the last guy who tried to
invade. But I'm feeling "kang kai" (Chinese for "generous") this
morning... ;)
do...@squid.wv.tek.com
>In <May.11.03.37...@galaxy.rutgers.edu>, gang...@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Sunil Gangwani) writes:
>>I am one of the frustrated OS/2 device developers struggling with the
>>incomplete documentation, buggy debug kernel supplied by Microsoft.
[ other typical OS/2 problems deleted to save space ]
>Of course, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. Your post sounds
>like you're another "Unix puke", and if I had half a mind (and my morning
>cup of coffee), I'd nuke you, like I did the last guy who tried to
>invade. But I'm feeling "kang kai" (Chinese for "generous") this
>morning... ;)
>
>Cheers,
>Larry Salomon, Jr. (aka 'Q') LAR...@YKTVMV.BITNET
>OS/2 Applications and Tools lar...@ibmman.watson.ibm.com
>IBM T.J. Watson Research Center lar...@eng.clemson.edu
>Yorktown Heights, NY
>
>Disclaimer: The statements and/or opinions stated above are strictly my
>own and do not reflect the views of my employer. Additionally, I have a
>reputation for being obnoxious, so don't take any personal attacks too
>seriously.
Regardless of your disclaimer, you *are* speaking in behalf of IBM. Given
the efforts that IBM is making to regain it's technical credibility, I don't
think they would appreciate you pushing them back into the mainframe
mentality days.
This kind of response does not belong here, try venting your OS/2 frustrations
in alt.flame instead.
Regards, Doug.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Doug Carter do...@orca.wv.tek.com (503) 685-2780 |
| Working at, but not for, Tektronix, Network Displays Division. |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Feustel
lar...@watson.ibm.com
>Regardless of your disclaimer, you *are* speaking in behalf of IBM. Given
>the efforts that IBM is making to regain it's technical credibility, I don't
>think they would appreciate you pushing them back into the mainframe
>mentality days.
>
>This kind of response does not belong here, try venting your OS/2 frustrations
>in alt.flame instead.
>
>Regards, Doug.
:flame.
Okay, Doug. Just for you, I will state FOR THE RECORD that I do not,
never intended to, and will not speak for IBM. I never claimed to, and I
don't expect you or anyone else to misconstrue my postings as such.
Indeed, if I were speaking for IBM, or even if any IBM management (and
this newsgroup is shadowed internally) THOUGHT I was speaking for IBM, I
would have had my Internet access revoked (or worse, fired) a long time
ago.
If you intend to ignore such blatant disclaimers, then I suggest you
complain to someone who is intimidated by such prate. ;)
Additionally, I have ALSO put in my disclaimer that I am very obnoxious.
Let me make that clear...
### ### ####### ####### ### ###
### ### ### ### ### #####
### ### ###### ####### ###
##### ### ### ### ###
### ####### ### ### ### OBNOXIOUS! (Get the picture? ;)
Please look up the word obnoxious and read it aloud 5 times. My
obnoxiousness, as well as my emotional responses to various postings, is
that of a calculated nature. Sometimes, people need a slap in the face
to wake up to reality.
:reality.
OS/2 is *NOT* a system that will write your programs for you! To make
matters worse, GUI programming adds to the complexity of the problem.
So, if you want to write a PM application, expect to do some work.
However, by utilitizing the comp.os.os2.programmer newsgroup to your
advantage, you will find that there are a lot of other people who have
encountered the same or similar problems and have a solution or
workaround to suit your needs.
:ereality.
My feelings are not OS/2 frustrations, but instead frustrations dealing
with Unix programmers who insist that Galileo was wrong and the universe
revolves around them. If someone is going to give up simply because
(s)he cannot get their application to work like they want it to then they
shouldn't be programming. Period.
:eflame.
ObOS/2: Printing is a hassle, and printing images (e.g. bitmaps) is even
worse. Upcoming in either my next seminar or the one following is the
end of the printing blues for application programmers.