Re: TWGS Upgrade Availability?

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Mitchell Spector wrote:
> 
> In article rubywand@swbell.net writes...
> 
> >Mitchell Spector writes ...
> >>     The TWGS-2B GAL was a DMA fix Applied Engineering issued for
> >> the board, and an absolute requirement for it to co-exist with a
> >> RamFAST SCSI board (without it the RamFAST will not function at
> >> all, and I would assume the Apple High Speed SCSI card as well).
> >>
> >>     With Applied Engineering long since out of business and the
> >> GAL virtually impossible to duplicate by convential means, that
> >> leaves no source for replacement GALs (except perhaps finding a
> >> dead TWGS board to pull it from; Alltech might be of help here
> >> if they have any in stock). As I mentioned before, I found it
> >> much more affordable (and less hassle) to just purchase a used
> >> TransWarp GS board to replace your old one.
> >
> >     Neat info! This probably explains the conflicting reports on
> >whether or not the TransWarp board is DMA compatible.
> 
>     No, not exactly. Without the TWGS-2B GAL, the TransWarp GS is
> not DMA compatible at all. Adding the chip *attempts* change that,
> but you end up with flakely DMA compatibility at best.
> 
> >     When you say the RamFAST will not work at all without the 2B GAL,
> >do you mean that a Rev D RamFAST board will not work even if RamFAST
> >setup Options are set for TWGS with DMA set OFF?
> 
>     If you have the original TWGS-2A GAL, the RamFAST will not work
> at all with the TransWarp GS (nothing short of swapping this GAL on
> the board will resolve that). Once you have the upgraded GAL, you
> still must set the option in the RamFAST menu to tell it you have
> a TransWarp GS present. If you still continued to have problems, it
> was recommended you disabled the DMA option in the menu.
> 
>     Once again, it is an *absolute requirement* that you have the
> TWGS-2B GAL if you use the TransWarp GS in the same system with a
> RamFAST SCSI controller (again, I don't know about the Apple High
> Speed SCSI, but would assume the situtation would be similar).
>

     Okay. Thanks for clearing things up, especially vis-a-vis RamFAST.



Rubywand