Talk:Disk controller

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article is based on material taken from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing prior to 1 November 2008 and incorporated under the "relicensing" terms of the GFDL, version 1.3 or later.

Disk controller of host adapter

An IDE or SCSI controller is not properly called a "disk controller". It is a host adapter. The disk controller is embedded in the drive. Mirror Vax 05:20, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, since no one has commented on this page since 2005, I'll look to merge this into host adapter. Timbatron 07:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment over at Disk controller. Ralf-Peter 02:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused, isn't this Disk Controller? Timbatron 15:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, moreover "Hardware RAID" para should be split to separate RAID controller. This is equally often done inside a host system as inside a standalone disk array. Also a Hardware RAID information from RAID should IMHO be merged with proposed RAID controller. --Kubanczyk 06:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merged partially --Kubanczyk 17:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colloquial Term

I changed the word "mechless" to "not mechanical" as the word "mechless" does not exist in the dictionary, nor is it a commonly used word in this field. Jeremyburkhart (talk) 06:49, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Need diagram and examples

The discussion of host adapter versus disk controller is too complicated, and seems to assume the reader already understands the issue being explained. A diagram laying out the flow of communication between disk and CPU would be nice, with labels for CPU, peripheral bus, host adapter and disk controller, along with a description of what function the host adapter and disk controller are performing. Examples with named host adapters and disk controllers would also help.

For myself, I understand the "positional" distinction, but I'm not sure I understand the functional distinction that is being made. I'm also not clear on whether the distinction applies in situations where the system board has a system bus. Does a system bus simplify this picture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.162.60 (talk) 04:06, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]