[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]You mean complain? Like you're complaining right now? It's all a matter of logic: There are probably more Windows XP users carrying over their old OS into a new build than there are Ultra ATA users carrying over their ancient hard drives. Therefor, the floppy interface, as outdated as it is, is more useful than the Ultra ATA interface.The problem as described is that you PAY for an Ultra ATA controller. Why bother? Even if you're an XP devotee you probably don't WANT to pay for an Ultra ATA connector.But for most motherboards, the floppy interface is free. It doesn't slow down boot times or performance either, if you don't need it you can ignore it.Well, maybe you can't ignore it, but a logic dictates over emotion in reviews.THG has no reason to love or hate the floppy connector, no stake in the legacy OS game, but anyone reader who wants to play the hater deserves to be called out for it. As for the manufacturers, honest reporting is Tom's Hardware's goal. Personally, I like the fact that some manufacturers provide legacy features and others don't, both types of products work well.[/citation]
Offering a selection of boards, one all modern (SATA, eSata, PCIe etc.) and still offering a old school version (IDE, PS/2, PCI, floppy etc.) does make sense. As much as we try to kill them, they aren't dead yet, and some people still use them.
Honestly, it's Foxconn Bloodrage for LGA 1366 boards for me (awesome boards for the $$), and a Foxconn P55MX for a LGA 1156 build (For only $90, it's a decent board, also microATX, which is nice). Mixed with a i5 750, 4GB of RAM, and a 4670, you got one hell of a budget gamer for el cheapo.
Sorry, but I just can't imagine building a LGA 1156 performance rig...
Nice article regardless.