• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Microchannel IDE controller

custm42435 said:
Would really be awesome to see a MCA to IDE card made, as my P70's hard drive (120mb) certainly won't last forever and it would be nice to use a CF card in it and be able to hit 2gb in partition sizes like my Eduquest Model Fifty has to go with its DX4-100 CPU. I would certainly buy one for both my P70 as well as my desktop model 70 that has a dead floppy drive since i can no longer install anything on to it. While a MCA version might not sell as many as XT-IDE ones do they would still definitely be snatched up quick by any collector with MCA machines.
Click to expand...

Whilst MCS to IDE would be "nice" so long as PATA drives are available why not add a SCSI card, which are available at reasonable cost, and then add a SCSI2SD card

https://store.inertialcomputing.com/SCSI2SD-V5-1-p/scsi2sd-v5.1.htm

I used one with a BusTech SCSI card in my PC Server/500. Its a bit slower than real disks in the Cheetah RAID array, but allowed me to back up the CHEETAH ...
 
I go away for a few months and look what happens...

MCA was designed to emulate ISA if needed (imagine re-writing ALL programs for MCA systems), and automatically converts edge triggered INTs to level sensitive. IBM at first just wanted to fix some poor PC bus stuff, but realized that such a thing would not meet EMI restrictions, or bus mastering, or I/O address issues, or fill in the blank. I say they did a technically smashing job of it.

The 800 pound gorilla in the room is that many current devices DEMAND an IDE interface with a compatible I/O address... Most (if not ALL) MCA IDE cards are for "auxiliary" HDs and CDROMs. They expect to be a secondary drive and depend on the primary drive (DBA-ESDI or SCSI) to provide boot support. The secondary HD controller addresses are not supported...

It is VERY EXPEN$$$IVE to buy SCSI to IDE adapters. The rage for Roland or Akai sampler storage has pushed affordable SCSI based Card readers into "the good old days".

As to a Card ID, chances are VERY low that there would be a conflict with any existing card. When you copy an options diskette, it then adds the CARD adf to the refdisk or system partition. So you have to load a specific adf. Alas, we are loosing the few people that know much about adf writing. However, IBM seems to have close-held their own adf references....
 
Yep, normal IBM jack-assery.

The IDE/SATA to SCSI converter issue REALLY boils my ass. I want a few of these: https://www.ebay.com/itm/263750112311 They WERE $250 a few months ago, but someone running that ebay store decided to drink the kool-aid on the price. At $250 I felt it was a high price, but not totally unreasonable. I would actually get one for my 9595 at $250.

Damn shame.

Edit:

I just noticed the listing out of south Korea for $890. And the "official" guy is screaming, "Buyers Beware: INPINITI IS NOT an Authorized UPC or OEM AUTHORIZED Distributor of 2SAN / ACARD Technology."!

*Insert colorful language here comparing the ebay seller 2san_inc to human excrement*

If I had the money/skill to recreate that converter I'd sell it for $5 out of pure spite.
 
Last edited:
The SCSI2SD works just fine in 90% of circumstances. You are limited to 64gb at present but thats bigger than any IDE drive available when MCA systems were current.
 
I went through the IDE to SCSI adapter phase when I got into macs in 2002 ish.
Still have a bunch of adapters in box with manuals and cables (purchased new):
ACARD AEC-7720u (IDE to 50 pin SCSI adapter)
ACARD ARS-2000FW (IDE to 68 pin SCSI sled the HD mounts onto)
Addonics ADAEC7722 (ATAPI to 68 pin SCSI adapter)
 
PeterNC said:
There are many regular OEM PCs that match/exceed PS/2 performance. So there is no compelling reason to invest in MCA PCB development. Very small PS/2 audience out there anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, there are many machines that outperform any vintage computer. What about the XT/IDE? There are definitely plenty of machines that outperform XTs.

I know that there obviously wouldn’t be as much demand for MCA cards, but I’m just saying that there are machines that “match/exceed PS/2 performance” is kind of a weak excuse.

If I knew how to design this stuff, I guarantee you I’d be making some MCA cards. Probably wouldn’t get rich, but that’s not what I’m after.
 
Nobody is making MCA cards because the interface is not well known, software and firmware would need to be done, and the cards would be full sized so not cheap. If there is a market to make ethernet for a C64 then there is a market for SATA and Sound (hell do both on the same card) for MCA, but the design is not simple or cheap like in the 8 bit world.
 
Unknown_K said:
Nobody is making MCA cards because the interface is not well known, software and firmware would need to be done, and the cards would be full sized so not cheap. If there is a market to make ethernet for a C64 then there is a market for SATA and Sound (hell do both on the same card) for MCA, but the design is not simple or cheap like in the 8 bit world.
Click to expand...

Yes, I get that the design wouldn't be as cheap as 8-bit. But I think if they could make an MCA sound card and sell it for around $200 or less, it would be worth it to us hard-core PS/2 fans. But I don't design boards, so I don't know about the cost of manufacture/design on stuff like that.

I'd pay $200 for an SB compatible card for my Model 80, but I think anymore than that would be too much. I normally wouldn't pay that much for one card, but I'd do it for the Model 80 being that it is one of my most favorite machines in my entire collection. I'd probably pay a little more for an IDE/SB combo card. I'd prefer IDE over SATA so I can use older 90s IDE hard drives in my PS/2. I just DO NOT want an SSD (or SATA hard drive) in my Model 80. I've got one on my Model 25 (with an XT/IDE) and like it, but the 80 just needs a nice, loud hard drive IMO.

For now, the 110MB ESDI monster it has in it is working fine. I've got OS/2 on it, but I'm thinking about wiping it and putting good ole DOS and Windows 3.1 on it, because OS/2, as cool as it is, just isn't as useful as DOS/Win3.1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top