🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ant0318150b0rfwx@nordlys.demon.co.uk>, Michael Kay
<mak@nordlys.demon.co.uk> writes
>Also you can connect other Hardware through it, I have a scsi adaptor into
>the back of the Zip which has my CD Rom connected to it.

... and you paid 50 quid for a parallel Zip drive...!?

Back to the original debate - Zip vs. Syquest: The main reason I went
for Zip is that you could buy blank discs in places like PC world if you
needed them in a hurry.  It didn't seem to me that the Syquest EZ
technonlogy was much better proven than Zip (it was the old Syquest
44/88 cartridges that were the "industry standard").  The Syquest drives
were cheap at the time but that was because they were being
discontinued.  The new EZflier does sound good, though.

Parallel versus serial Zip:

Parallel is nice and portable - you can plug it into other computers,
Arc or PC.  OTOH there are printers, dongles, scanners, MIDI interfaces,
Turbo Drivers queuing up to use your parallel port.

SCSI is faster.  The mark-up from VTI or Clares on the Parallel drive
will pay for a good fraction of your SCSI card.  If you already have
SCSI, or if you have any other use for a SCSI card then you'd have to
really, really want the portability in order to buy a parallel drive.



  

-- 
Daniel Pead