Please refer to opening statements of this topic and more specifically, this:
“We will be explaining and showing real world results related to upgrading internal storage with large IDE/PATA drives, large mechanical SATA drives, and of course, SATA SSD drives.”
In addition, the prefaced primary focus of these efforts was to optimize and increase performance of these machines (using the specific machines themselves) without “SCSI technologies and SATA add-in cards, since we will be focusing on the absolute cheapest way to go for our members on a low budget ”.
given that the whole line of 4 machines of the DA series was released in 2001(!) it was not to expect that their weird apple-only ATA 4.5 / ATA 6 nonsense only supports classic OS out of the box. when the 533 DP came out that was only 7 months before the QS 2001 were shipping with 10.0. - and OSX fully supported a PM 7100 hardware, isn´t it.
Seems all a bit moot here as the QS 2001 also had the Ultra ATA/66 (ATA-5) HD Interface and was also similarly limited - until the 2002 QS “B” boards. Refer to graphic above: http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9786;image
but good that you noticed it in time, and maybe there is a real fix one day to replace your current workaround.
Again, all in an effort to optimize and possibly increase performance with these machines, in a low-cost manner. (And of course to keep you mildly amused.) ;)
i am living am a bit out of the drive setup realm because for me personally it is normal to originally format drives under 10.4.11 and then use them mostly under OS9.
Do please explain how this might be possible with a Digital Audio, using only a Digital Audio - to accomplish this formatting with Tiger for the DA? All of my attempts to format internal DA drives (HDD & SSD) with Tiger… and only with a DA booted from a Tiger Install Disc - reported the drives as only 128 GB in spite of their actual size. IF you’ve an approach that I am unaware of, such information could be helpful in this effort. (And no fair using a machine other than a DA to do so.)
*I prefer to format, partition and install OS’es almost always in a Quicksilver and then move those drives to their targeted “host” machines (in this case a DA). But that’s a little cheating here and perhaps questionable.
of course a good solution will always include full support for dual boot use cases as well as OS9-only machines.
Exactly. And the reason why the 480 GB SSD was tested and those results posted above. And, as mentioned… testing of any “Ghost Partition” theory is still necessary to determine IF that large remaining space would be fully accessible / usable to OS 9. Thus, the invitation for Digital Audio (or similar machine) owners to test it.
The theoretical “Ghost Partition” approach allows for:
(1). Dual-booting between OS 9 and OS X from the SSD and…
(2). Possible use of that remaining (367 GB) on a fourth partition and…
(3). The possible addition of another HDD - in the bottom position (master jumper)
48 mb/s on a 66 MB/ bus is not great. but also not catastrophic.
except maybe for audio people who needed the bandwidth more than the ultra fast search time a SSD offers.
i wonder if the cheapo bribge and/or the fact that you were using different partitions might have some influence in that result? have you tried running a 70mb/s IDE HD in comparison?
Are you confusing mega-bits (mb/sec) with Mega-Bytes (MB/sec)? ;)
Well, the Crucial 480 GB SSD did test slightly better than that. AND the Addonics or StarTech “RED” Marvel-based adapters have yet to be tested to see if they might provide better numbers. (They did not in the G3 B&W.) BUT here, even the inexpensive Inland 128 GB SSD (also with a Bribge adapter) QuickBenched better than 48 MB/sec. http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9779;image
And it seems that in my haste, I neglected to attach / post the QuickBench results from the Crucial 480 GB SSD. (Too many tests and too many graphics here lately… I simply forgot it.) Here it is now:
(http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6233.0;attach=9870;image)
And while the DA might not be the first choice for “audio people”
it does seem that it is improving here - and at very little added cost.
"Why not four-partition the drive with three equal partitions that
would total 128 GB - AND leave the balance beyond 128 GB to
the remaining fourth partition?"
not a solution for 2 TB disks.
Sorry, no 2 TB disks here to test…
but welcome any attempts by other DA owners.
(And especially you IIO.) :)
AND really looking forward to your insights & contributions to the Quicksilver and MDD portions of this exercise - when those two are tested & examined here. In the meantime, I’ll try to get back to your questions concerning the Mac Mini SSD adapters and the 1TB SSD here: http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,5955.msg44520.html#msg44520
Test, test, testing, and more testing.