SCSI contra IDE SATA

[topic58]

Hi there, a question here: if you compare windows and Linux, how many in percentage do you think use SCSI or IDE SATA on windows and Linux? It's a discussion between me and a friend of mine. I say SCSI is more common among Linux than IDE SATA. What do you think?

[mstlyevil]

Hi there, a question here: if you compare windows and Linux, how many in percentage do you think use SCSI or IDE SATA on windows and Linux? It's a discussion between me and a friend of mine. I say SCSI is more common among Linux than IDE SATA. What do you think?

SATA by far. Contrary to popular opinion most Linux users are not IT geeks but are regular users. They either use Linux for political reasons, can't afford Windows or they just prefer the superior security and flexibility that Linux offers. Besides most people that use SCSI usually put them in servers and workstations and not on desktops.

[poofyhairguy]

Hi there, a question here: if you compare windows and Linux, how many in percentage do you think use SCSI or IDE SATA on windows and Linux? It's a discussion between me and a friend of mine. I say SCSI is more common among Linux than IDE SATA. What do you think?

I think that MAYBE SCSI would win because there are probably more Linux servers out there than Linux desktops. I mean...thats Linux's strongest area.

But if you are just counting desktop use, SATA by like a few million.

[prizrak]

I agree with the rest home users don't run SCSI way too expensive even though its faster than the rest. SATA comes with every new motherboard anyways I'd say that xATA is the biggest since alot of people run Linux on older hardware so they most likely run PATA drives and newer machines come with SATA generally.
Servers are all about SCSI for now they are changing to SATA II lately though since the performance is pretty close while the price is much less.