«

I used to set my IDE devices manually as master or slave depending on where
they were on the cable but I recently discovered that with Cable Select, you
just have to put the "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in the
middle and it is configured automatically. So why even have master/slave
jumpers then? Why not just have the drives hard-wired to Cable Select?

"0054040905416" <> wrote in message
news:ddbAg.9081$j9.6882@trnddc02...
>I used to set my IDE devices manually as master or slave depending on where
> they were on the cable but I recently discovered that with Cable Select,
> you
> just have to put the "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in
> the
> middle and it is configured automatically. So why even have master/slave
> jumpers then? Why not just have the drives hard-wired to Cable Select?
>
for backwards compatibility in older computers that don't support the
80 wire IDE cables. Also many if not most external drive cases don't
support CS.

"pen" <> wrote in message
news:2J-...
>
> "0054040905416" <> wrote in message
> news:ddbAg.9081$j9.6882@trnddc02...
>>I used to set my IDE devices manually as master or slave depending on
>>where
>> they were on the cable but I recently discovered that with Cable Select,
>> you
>> just have to put the "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in
>> the
>> middle and it is configured automatically. So why even have master/slave
>> jumpers then? Why not just have the drives hard-wired to Cable Select?
>>
> for backwards compatibility in older computers that don't support the
> 80 wire IDE cables. Also many if not most external drive cases don't
> support CS.

Yes but are not the extra wires just 40 earth cables?
No extra signals just some earth shielding?

"Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
news:JxpAg.110139$...
>
> "pen" <> wrote in message
> news:2J-...
>>
>> "0054040905416" <> wrote in message
>> news:ddbAg.9081$j9.6882@trnddc02...
>>>I used to set my IDE devices manually as master or slave depending on
>>>where
>>> they were on the cable but I recently discovered that with Cable Select,
>>> you
>>> just have to put the "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in
>>> the
>>> middle and it is configured automatically. So why even have
>>> master/slave
>>> jumpers then? Why not just have the drives hard-wired to Cable Select?
>>>
>> for backwards compatibility in older computers that don't support the
>> 80 wire IDE cables. Also many if not most external drive cases don't
>> support CS.
>
> Yes but are not the extra wires just 40 earth cables?
> No extra signals just some earth shielding?
There is also the CS part on pin 28, which may not be there.

"pen" <> wrote in message
news:. ..
>
> "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
> news:JxpAg.110139$...
>>
>> "pen" <> wrote in message
>> news:2J-...
>>>
>>> "0054040905416" <> wrote in message
>>> news:ddbAg.9081$j9.6882@trnddc02...
>>>>I used to set my IDE devices manually as master or slave depending on
>>>>where
>>>> they were on the cable but I recently discovered that with Cable
>>>> Select, you
>>>> just have to put the "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave"
>>>> in the
>>>> middle and it is configured automatically. So why even have
>>>> master/slave
>>>> jumpers then? Why not just have the drives hard-wired to Cable Select?
>>>>
>>> for backwards compatibility in older computers that don't support the
>>> 80 wire IDE cables. Also many if not most external drive cases don't
>>> support CS.

On newer computers that support Cable Select, is it more of a reliable and
solid decision to put the jumpers in the Master and Slave position as well
as putting "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in the middle?
Sort of a belt and suspenders approach.

Dave C.

"Dave C." <myaddress.net> wrote in message
news:. ..
> "pen" <> wrote in message
> news:. ..
>>
>> "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
>> news:JxpAg.110139$...
>>>
>>> "pen" <> wrote in message
>>> news:2J-...
>>>>
>>>> "0054040905416" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:ddbAg.9081$j9.6882@trnddc02...
>>>>>I used to set my IDE devices manually as master or slave depending on
>>>>>where
>>>>> they were on the cable but I recently discovered that with Cable
>>>>> Select, you
>>>>> just have to put the "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave"
>>>>> in the
>>>>> middle and it is configured automatically. So why even have
>>>>> master/slave
>>>>> jumpers then? Why not just have the drives hard-wired to Cable
>>>>> Select?
>>>>>
>>>> for backwards compatibility in older computers that don't support the
>>>> 80 wire IDE cables. Also many if not most external drive cases don't
>>>> support CS.
>
> On newer computers that support Cable Select, is it more of a reliable and
> solid decision to put the jumpers in the Master and Slave position as well
> as putting "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in the middle?
> Sort of a belt and suspenders approach.

I set my two drives up master-slave initially as I did not have a 80 pin
cable,
now I have bought an 80 pin cable, I have gone to cable select however if I
want
to swop the drives (change the master) it means I have to physically swop
the
driver, ie unplug, remove and swop them over with all the fiddling that
involves.There
is also the potentially to damage something.
With master slave I simply have to swop a few jumpers.
I think I will switch back!!! (Is that a good idea?)


>
> Dave C.
>

--
Dave C.

"Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
news:AEsAg.31$...
>
> "Dave C." <myaddress.net> wrote in message
> news:. ..
>> "pen" <> wrote in message
>> news:. ..
>>>
>>> "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
>>> news:JxpAg.110139$...
>>>>
>>>> "pen" <> wrote in message
>>>> news:2J-...
>>>>>
>>>>> "0054040905416" <> wrote in message
>>>>> news:ddbAg.9081$j9.6882@trnddc02...
>>
>> On newer computers that support Cable Select, is it more of a reliable
>> and solid decision to put the jumpers in the Master and Slave position as
>> well as putting "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in the
>> middle? Sort of a belt and suspenders approach.
>
> I set my two drives up master-slave initially as I did not have a 80 pin
> cable,
> now I have bought an 80 pin cable, I have gone to cable select however if
> I want
> to swop the drives (change the master) it means I have to physically swop
> the
> driver, ie unplug, remove and swop them over with all the fiddling that
> involves.There
> is also the potentially to damage something.
> With master slave I simply have to swop a few jumpers.
> I think I will switch back!!! (Is that a good idea?)
>

Bazzer, I think I know what you mean here, but let me repeat what I think
you said. Do you mean that the master can stay at the cable end but change
the jumper to slave and the slave can stay at the middle but the jumper
changed to the master position? That way on rebooting, the former slave
becomes the master and the former master at the cable end becomes the slave?

The reason that I am interested in this is that my 80 gig C: drive is my
master and my 80 gig D: drive is my slave. I use XXClone to frequently
clone my C drive to my D drive. If and when my C drive fails, therefore
would I only need to change the jumpers and not fiddle with a physical drive
swap? However in this case, I would probably make the physical switch
because I would be removing the failed drive anyway.

>> I set my two drives up master-slave initially as I did not have a 80 pin
>> cable,
>> now I have bought an 80 pin cable, I have gone to cable select however if
>> I want
>> to swop the drives (change the master) it means I have to physically swop
>> the
>> driver, ie unplug, remove and swop them over with all the fiddling that
>> involves.There
>> is also the potentially to damage something.
>> With master slave I simply have to swop a few jumpers.
>> I think I will switch back!!! (Is that a good idea?)
>>
>
> Bazzer, I think I know what you mean here, but let me repeat what I think
> you said. Do you mean that the master can stay at the cable end but
> change the jumper to slave and the slave can stay at the middle but the
> jumper changed to the master position? That way on rebooting, the former
> slave becomes the master and the former master at the cable end becomes
> the slave?

Yes I think that is what I could have done if I had the jumpers set to
master
and slave setting, for example if I had cloned my master drive to the slave,
and
the master drive failed, (for whatever reason, hardware or software
(virus??))
I could then simply power down the computer and set the jumper on the
former master drive to slave, and vice versa for the slave, and I would be
up and running again in a matter of minutes.
However with having them as cable select I have to rearrange the drives on
the
cable, this means physically swopping the drives in the bays because the
cable
is not flexible enough to do it any other way.

Mind you I guess I could just change the jumper settings from cable select
to master and slave settings, however I am not sure if this willl work on a
80 'pin'
cable. I guess I could try though.
My worry is that I might damage the good drive whilst swopping bays, mind
you
it's 'fiddley' changing the jumpers with the drives in the machine too.


>
> The reason that I am interested in this is that my 80 gig C: drive is my
> master and my 80 gig D: drive is my slave. I use XXClone to frequently
> clone my C drive to my D drive. If and when my C drive fails, therefore
> would I only need to change the jumpers and not fiddle with a physical
> drive swap?

Yes, on my new machine physical swopping drives is difficult because of the
(weird)
way they are held in the housing, they are also difficult to 'get at'. On
the old machine
I could easilly whip off the connectors and slide them out, no risk of
damaging them.
Swopping jumpers would be a lot easier for me now.

Regarding XXclone, I could 'clone' my drive simply by copying and pasting
the
root directory (but I didn't copy the swopfile, one - because it is not
needed,
and two - because you might be copying a 'problem' accross).

I am going to try and clone my current drive (its XP not 98 now) in the same
away onto my new 250meg drive (which seems to be quieter). I will have to
clone the recover partition too. It will either work or it won't, I guess I
will find
out!


> However in this case, I would probably make the physical switch because I
> would be removing the failed drive anyway.
>

Dave C. wrote:

> On newer computers that support Cable Select, is it more of a reliable and
> solid decision to put the jumpers in the Master and Slave position as well
> as putting "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in the middle?
> Sort of a belt and suspenders approach.

The drives have to be jumpered to CS, or they won't detect the ground on
pin #28, which tells the drive that it's master when it's on the end
connector. The ground, (from the MB), by-passes the center connector's
pin #28 and this lack of ground tells that drive it's slave.

Wrong combinations of jumper and cable position sometimes work, but may
cause trouble when you least expect! Don't do it!!!

--
Virg Wall, PE

"VWWall" <> wrote in message
news:5TvAg.7625$ ink.net...
> Dave C. wrote:
>
>> On newer computers that support Cable Select, is it more of a reliable
>> and solid decision to put the jumpers in the Master and Slave position as
>> well as putting "master" on the end of the cable and the "slave" in the
>> middle? Sort of a belt and suspenders approach.
>
> The drives have to be jumpered to CS, or they won't detect the ground on
> pin #28, which tells the drive that it's master when it's on the end
> connector. The ground, (from the MB), by-passes the center connector's
> pin #28 and this lack of ground tells that drive it's slave.
>
> Wrong combinations of jumper and cable position sometimes work, but may
> cause trouble when you least expect! Don't do it!!!
>
> --
> Virg Wall, PE


Bazzer, please note Virg Wall's comments above. That is info I did not know
about. So, what I would do in the event of my C drive failure is to
physically change drives. Both my C and D drives jumpers are presently set
for CS. Bazzer, if you have a failure, changing the drives which may be a
little of a hassel would only have to be done once.