Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ballzdeep · Dec 7, 2006, 05:02 PM

also, is e-sata bootable with a mac like firewire connected drives are?

mduell · Dec 7, 2006, 08:34 PM

Not without a lot of hardware hacking.

Yes. eSATA is just SATA with more shielding.

ballzdeep · Dec 7, 2006, 09:19 PM

ok, was wondering if the OSX would recognize an external sata (though connected to the board via a card) without a 'driver' or something to recognize it. Coming from a windoze machine, I can't boot from a sata drive (that's not install to the main board's default sata channels) from a 3rd party sata card because it doesn't recognize it until it boots windows (and the driver)

CharlesS · Dec 7, 2006, 10:20 PM

The iMac doesn't have eSATA, as far as I know, so the point is moot.

It's not mentioned here, anyway:

Apple - iMac - Tech Specs

ballzdeep · Dec 7, 2006, 11:23 PM

is there a place I wonder for a pci card similar to the ones that you can put in a macpro for e-sata via it?

CharlesS · Dec 8, 2006, 01:45 AM

No, the iMac has no PCI slots.

To get that "pro feature" you have to spend $2200.

mduell · Dec 8, 2006, 07:19 PM

By "a lot of hardware hacking" I mean attaching an extension cable to the internal SATA port and routing it out of the case.

ghporter · Dec 8, 2006, 10:42 PM

Along with the (literal) hacking Mark describes, you'd want to use the highest quality SATA cable you can find with this setup; a cheap cable could intercept who knows what electronic interference and conduct it inside your iMac's case. I think the best idea (short of -HINT HINT- Apple adding an eSATA port) is to install an eSATA port yourself and then use normal grade cables. Not easy, not particularly neat, but it would be more electronically secure.

ecking01 · Dec 10, 2006, 06:08 PM

Why would you need esata on an imac to boot from? Those things are already fast a hell!

boston_errol · Dec 11, 2006, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by ecking01

Why would you need esata on an imac to boot from? Those things are already fast a hell!

In order to have a great external solution for demanding disk needs, such as videos, photos, etc. It's something basic that the iMac should have or the ability to add on. I'm a proponent of throwing a cardbus slot on the iMac.

Certain external eSATA RAID or JBOD drives can be obscenely useful

ballzdeep · Dec 12, 2006, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by ecking01

Why would you need esata on an imac to boot from? Those things are already fast a hell!

reason being that if your imac internal hdd fails, you want to be able to boot from an external drive (in this case esata, I know firewire works for external boot)

ecking01 · Dec 14, 2006, 02:50 AM

Is using firewire to boot from not as fast as using the internal to boot from?
Even if it's my mbp's 80gb 5400rpm vs a firewire 250gb 720rpm disk?

SciFrog · Dec 14, 2006, 12:59 PM

Don't like FW800? It is pretty fast.

mduell · Dec 14, 2006, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by SciFrog

Don't like FW800? It is pretty fast.

It's slower than eSATA and costs about three times as much.

SciFrog · Dec 14, 2006, 08:06 PM

True, but except for RAID, the speed is fast enough. And it costs more but again it is significant only for multi drive enclosures, which is more Mac pro land...

mduell · Dec 14, 2006, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by SciFrog

And it costs more but again it is significant only for multi drive enclosures, which is more Mac pro land...

A single drive enclosure for FW800 is about $50/200% more than eSATA.

CharlesS · Dec 15, 2006, 01:27 AM

Additionally, FireWire has to go through a FireWire-to-ATA bridge chip, which is going to slow things down somewhat. With eSATA, you'll be connecting using the drive's native interface, so it'll be faster even disregarding the speed difference between the two busses.

P · Dec 15, 2006, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Additionally, FireWire has to go through a FireWire-to-ATA bridge chip, which is going to slow things down somewhat. With eSATA, you'll be connecting using the drive's native interface, so it'll be faster even disregarding the speed difference between the two busses.

It is faster because the latency (=access time) is lower, yes. The bandwidth is the same. Depends on your application which measurement is important. In my case, the external drive is only used for backups, so the latency is completely irrelevant. Cost isn't, however, so I ended up with a USB 2.0 drive.