Category talk:DEC Disk Drives

Adding DEC disk sub-categories?

I plan to add the series of DEC RFxx disk drives (about a dozen) for the DSSI Bus. Without sub-categories the category "DEC Disk Drives" will grow considerably. Should I start creating sub-categories (RP, RM, RA, RD, RF, ...)? Vaxorcist (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2023 (CEST)

I don't have a problem with adding a few categories (e.g. 'DEC Floppy Drives'), but I don't think we need one for each name prefix. The 'Rxyy' drive name itself does that well enough, I think; so no RK, RP, etc categories. What other ones make sense? 'DEC Removable-pack Drives' (for RK, RP, RM - although I guess the RP07 and maybe the RM80 were non-removable)? And I guess 'DEC Fixed-head Drives' for the RS11, RS03, RS04, etc. 'DEC Fixed-pack Drives' (for RA 81, ??) I don't know enough about the RD's, etc to have any idea about them. I'm not sure if 'fixed-pack' is the right term to use; I'm too lazy/busy to read the DEC documents and see what term DEC used. Jnc (talk) 16:45, 13 August 2023 (CEST)

There will be about 40 RZxx (SCSI) disk models altogether (not even counting the "newest" ones), too, so a "Winchester" category for all of the fixed disk drives will be quite filled. Why not split them by interface type? Yes, maybe it doesn't make sense to split the MASSBUS drives into different categories. But I think an "MSCP" category would make sense covering all the RAxx and RDxx drives. Additionally one category for the ancient Fixed-head Drives, one for SCSI, and one for DSSI. Vaxorcist (talk) 17:10, 13 August 2023 (CEST)

A 'Winchester' sub-category would makes sense, as would an MSCP sub-category - but that's dividing them by i) internals (the Winchesters) or ii) the interface (the MSCP drives). I think the first question is 'do we use divisions of type i) or type ii) - or both'. ('Both' is something we have done elsewhere - see, for example, Category: QBUS Serial Interfaces and Category: DEC Asynchronous Serial Interfaces. More work - but good for finding things.)

Actually, isn't MSCP layered on top of something else (sorry, I am not very familiar with that generation, to know the answer)? I would think that, if going with ii), it makes sense to divide them into groups which can be plugged in together - can all MSCP drives be plugged into the same controller(s)? (To me, that is a fundamental division: 'can A and B both plug into X'. If not, I think A and B don't belong together in the same lowest-level category - although you might group several sub-categories together into an 'MSCP' category).

You don't want to have a 'floppy' sub-category? Jnc (talk) 18:16, 13 August 2023 (CEST)