Re: SCSI vs S-ATA
From: Melodie Young (mely_at_kirkwoodelectric.com)
Date: 08/06/04
- Next message: Carol Chisholm: "Re: Server hijacked for mass mailings?"
- Previous message: Dave Taylor: "SBS with another DC over DSL link"
- In reply to: Steve Foster [SBS MVP]: "Re: SCSI vs S-ATA"
- Next in thread: root: "Re: SCSI vs S-ATA"
- Reply: root: "Re: SCSI vs S-ATA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:47:22 -0400
Steve - Please stop shedding light upon the root. You're only wasting your
time and assisting root make what should be a simple thread into an
annoyance for all readers.
Root - perhaps this behavior is acceptable in other NGs you frequent, but
not in an SBS NG.
Now, if we all ignore him he will go away.
Melodie
"Steve Foster [SBS MVP]" <steve.foster@picamar.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0dlol5l4m0kgm00g@msnews.microsoft.com...
> root wrote:
>
> > The trouble with AMD classically is that they always used VIA
> > chipsets and classically they never worked reliably nor robustly.
> > That went on for long enough such that I wont look again at AMD until
> > there's a considerable history of AMD being OK. OR maybe when Intel
> > starts making chipsets for Opterons<G>.
>
> Would that be the same Via that supplies Intel with chipsets?
>
> And AMD must be doing something right for Intel to copy them (and
> tacitly admit that Itanium is essentially a failure).
>
> --
> Steve Foster [SBS MVP]
> ---------------------------------------
> MVPs do not work for Microsoft. Please reply only to the newsgroups.
- Next message: Carol Chisholm: "Re: Server hijacked for mass mailings?"
- Previous message: Dave Taylor: "SBS with another DC over DSL link"
- In reply to: Steve Foster [SBS MVP]: "Re: SCSI vs S-ATA"
- Next in thread: root: "Re: SCSI vs S-ATA"
- Reply: root: "Re: SCSI vs S-ATA"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
