Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

architim · Feb 21, 2002, 07:03 PM

I recently purchased a Lite-On 32x12x40x cd-rw with which I am very happy. The down side to this was that I was no longer able to use my dvd-ram drive (not a big hit, but I can't watch movies). So I then purchased a firewire enclosure manufactured by a company called New Motion Technology.
This little case has an ATA/IDE to firewire/usb1.1 bridge. Installation was easy but to my surprise the whole thing wouldn't work until I replaced the ATA cable with an IDE cable. Oops I guess the apple dvd-rams are IDE only. Eventually I ended up switching the cd-rw into the enclosure and putting the dvd-ram back into my one (erg!!) 5.25" bay (this included switching back to the ATA cable). Still couldn't get it to work. (At this point i knew the drive worked because I had tested it on a WinXP machine). I ended up downloading a classic firewire driver for the newmotiontech support site and installing it in the classic system folder. To my amazement, in OS X 10.1.3, this made the drive pop up next time I updated devices in apple sys profiler.

After lengthly description, my question. Anyone know why installing a classic driver, in the classic system folder would make OS X recognize a drive?

Eug · Feb 22, 2002, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by architim:
<STRONG>I recently purchased a Lite-On 32x12x40x cd-rw with which I am very happy. The down side to this was that I was no longer able to use my dvd-ram drive (not a big hit, but I can't watch movies). So I then purchased a firewire enclosure manufactured by a company called New Motion Technology.
This little case has an ATA/IDE to firewire/usb1.1 bridge. Installation was easy but to my surprise the whole thing wouldn't work until I replaced the ATA cable with an IDE cable. Oops I guess the apple dvd-rams are IDE only. Eventually I ended up switching the cd-rw into the enclosure and putting the dvd-ram back into my one (erg!!) 5.25" bay (this included switching back to the ATA cable). Still couldn't get it to work. (At this point i knew the drive worked because I had tested it on a WinXP machine). I ended up downloading a classic firewire driver for the newmotiontech support site and installing it in the classic system folder. To my amazement, in OS X 10.1.3, this made the drive pop up next time I updated devices in apple sys profiler.

After lengthly description, my question. Anyone know why installing a classic driver, in the classic system folder would make OS X recognize a drive?

</STRONG>

??? An ATA cable is an IDE cable.

architim · Feb 23, 2002, 01:17 AM

ATA followed IDE. ATA cables are higher density although the connections are identical 40-pin connectors. ATA is not?? backwards compatable. But that wasn't intended to be the question as the drive works sporadically now but only after installing drivers for classic.

Big Mac · Feb 23, 2002, 01:52 AM

So what was the upshot of the process? Does your drive now work again? OS X doesn't rely on classic for its peripheral arbitration - that much is abundantly obvious. And even if Classic some how gained access to the drive through a shim, it wouldn't automatically make the drive function in OS X. Why would an older firewire driver have access to the drive when the newer, pre-installed driver did not? This is a strange situation indeed. Can OS X see the drive without Classic being loaded?

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Feb 25, 2002, 01:59 AM

Not to harp on it, but there is no ATA cable vs. IDE cable. IDE (Integrated Drive Electronics) refers to the device attached to an ATA connection, and the 'AT' in ATA is actually the very same AT as in the case type of a PC... AT and ATX. It literally means (originally) an Attachment to an AT-style PC, as opposed to earlier ESDI devices.

What I find funny, is not many people realize that ATA-2, UATA, EIDE etc. we've come to take for granted as 'standards' of some kind, but are actually marketing names for similar things, dreamed up by none other than Seagate and Western Digital.

ATA is the original IDE standard. Perhaps you are thinking of UDMA(UATA)/33/66 vs. 100/133 connectors?

Eug · Feb 25, 2002, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by architim:
<STRONG>ATA followed IDE. ATA cables are higher density although the connections are identical 40-pin connectors. ATA is not?? backwards compatable. But that wasn't intended to be the question as the drive works sporadically now but only after installing drivers for classic.</STRONG>

You might want to read this ATA/IDE FAQ.

In addition, I've used 40-wire IDE cables just fine on ATA66 controllers (albeit limited to ATA33), and I've used 80-wire IDE cables just fine at ATA33. And furthermore, an ATA66 or ATA100 drive should work fine on an ATA33 controller, and will even work fine on an ATA66 controller at ATA33 with a 40-wire cable.