Verily did dennis write:

> This is all nice and accurate (but unattainable), but the real reason to
> go with PCI is because its new and accepted and EISA is old and dying.
> Many vendors are developing PCI products, few (if any) are developing 
>  EISA products. Since PCI is more widely used, there are more products 
> and they're less expensive....and PCI is 4X faster.

Not necessarily.  (Well, mostly true, but not entirely)

Take Intel's EtherExpress Pro 100BaseT adaptor for example.  They make
an EISA version, but it isn't widely known since they advertise heavily
on the PCI one.

The EISA bus will still be around for server-class machines for quite
a while - until cascaded PCI-bus (more than {3,4} PCI slots) motherboards
are popular.  AFAIK, HP, in their NetServer boxen, are the only/most-popular
cascaded PCI-bus motherboards available.

In the meanwhile, PCI slots are precious and the "next best thing" is EISA.

An Example, 

If Jake Foo wanted to PCI the world on his machine, he would have one
video card, one ethernet adaptor, and one scsi controller on the PCI
bus to start out.  For 50% (mebbe more?) of the motherboards, that's
it.

If he wanted to do the Matrox dual-head (mmm) thing, then he would need
another PCI slot; if he wanted to add another SCSI controller, he'd need
another PCI slot; ... ad nausium.

Yah, yah, who's going to put two hd-controllers -and- two video cards in
their system?  (Uhh, I will.  :> )

obtw: The Buslogic BT757C EISA Fast Wide SCSI controllers work very well
      with NetBSD.

-- Rob
----------------------------------------
Internet: windsor@pobox.com      Life: Rob@Sunnyvale.California.USA.Earth
"Da Web": http://pobox.com/~windsor/

"Ain't much distance 'tween a pat on the back and a kick in the pants."
    -- David Lee Roth (1990), `The Dogtown Shuffle'