Standard Organizations

[YARDofSTUF]

SATA IO
IEEE
ATAPI
INCITS

Do we really need them?

The 300MB/sec SATA II isnt endorsed by SATA IO

IEEE doesnt approve Pre N stuff

ATAPI is trying to make a 166 IDE standard?

INCITS is working on 640 adn 1280MB/sec SCSI standards, while SATA IO wants to do SAS(serial attached scsi) that should be faster or slower, but why do both?

Where are these groups getting their money and WHY?

 

[jpmkm]

What are you talking about? For one thing, IEEE does a hell of a lot more than wireless networking standards. And ATAPI is a standard, not an organization.

 

[YARDofSTUF]

What are you talking about? For one thing, IEEE does a hell of a lot more than wireless networking standards. And ATAPI is a standard, not an organization.

ya i'm giving examples of what is in action without standards in place. YA ATAPI is a standard, thats why its in the thread, why are people working on a ATA166 standard?

Reading about a ton of these things in school, if products are comign out that break the standards, why bother wastiong the money on them?

 

[jpmkm]

Well there are a couple main ways standards come into being. One is by committee - a group of people/companies with a vested interest in the standard get together and work it out before the standard is used. The other way is for the standard to just develop naturally over time. It's not declared a standard until quite a while after it was originally developed. Ethernet developed largely in this manner.

Why shouldn't people be working on an ATA166 standard? If nobody is working on new standards then technology will stagnate. There's nothing wrong with producing products that don't adhere to a recognized standard, nor is there anything wrong with buying those products. Sure, some early adopters might get shit on if the particular technology fails to gain ground, but that's kinda how it is with most new technologies, regardless of standards. Eventually, though, if the technologies you mentioned take off, then I'm sure they'll be made into a standard.

If we had to wait around for committees to approve and standardize every little technological change then we'd still be in a technological stoneage.

 

[YARDofSTUF]

Well there are a couple main ways standards come into being. One is by committee - a group of people/companies with a vested interest in the standard get together and work it out before the standard is used. The other way is for the standard to just develop naturally over time. It's not declared a standard until quite a while after it was originally developed. Ethernet developed largely in this manner.

Why shouldn't people be working on an ATA166 standard? If nobody is working on new standards then technology will stagnate. There's nothing wrong with producing products that don't adhere to a recognized standard, nor is there anything wrong with buying those products. Sure, some early adopters might get shit on if the particular technology fails to gain ground, but that's kinda how it is with most new technologies, regardless of standards. Eventually, though, if the technologies you mentioned take off, then I'm sure they'll be made into a standard.

If we had to wait around for committees to approve and standardize every little technological change then we'd still be in a technological stoneage.

THe thing with ata166, its a waste, IDE has moved to sata that is bursting to 300MB/sec, why develop 166 now?

I dont think we should wait for commitees, I dont think we need them. They seem to overlap.

 

[jpmkm]

THe thing with ata166, its a waste, IDE has moved to sata that is bursting to 300MB/sec, why develop 166 now?

I dont think we should wait for commitees, I dont think we need them. They seem to overlap.

Using that logic, IDE wouldn't even exist today since SCSI has traditionally been much faster than IDE. Just because you can't see a need for ata166 doesn't mean there isn't a need for it somewhere. Besides, it's not like tax dollars are funding ata166 and you're obviously not going to be buying those drives, so why complain about it? There's plenty of standards out there that I'll never use and I don't see the point, but I'm not going to go around complaining that they exist.

 

[YARDofSTUF]

There would still be a need for IDE in my logic, price

 

[jpmkm]

There would still be a need for IDE in my logic, price

I was going off your original statement that ata166 was pointless since it wasn't as fast as SATA. But combining price and speed, SCSI should now be dead, right?

What I'm getting at is that there will still be a market for ATA166, even though you personally don't see the point. It's not an issue of whether you think there are better standards; it's an issue of whether there's a market for a given standard. If there is, then it will be developed. I still don't see why you have such a problem with it.