🚀 go-pugleaf

Scott L Parrish (parrisc@mail.auburn.edu) wrote:
: Mike Muise (mjmuise@novice.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
: : [...] I can't imagine what I'd use the zip for if I couldn't 
: : carry it around and plug it into other PC's [...] is portability 
: : a total non-issue for most folks out there?
: 
: This is a pretty good reason for the drives being more popular on macs.  
: In order for a Zip to be portable on a PC you would have to have the 
: parallel version.  On a mac the SCSI version is portable.....only the 
: oldest macs dont have SCSI and installing one is as easy as plugging it in.
: 
: This may be the case with the parallel version for PC's as well.  How 
: much configuration does a PC system need to work with a zip?  Also, what 
: is the throughput of PC parallel ports?
: 
Not very much, if it's parallel.  You plug in the cable to the drive and 
the PC, attach the power box, and run GUEST, which searches for the drive 
for about 4 seconds, and then takes up 25k of RAM.  Without moving the
parallel port to the front of the case, it couldn't be much easier. I
honestly have no idea what kind of configuration you need if the PC is
SCSI.   

The throughput is adequate for me, about 6-8 meg/minute on stock ports.  
This doubles or triples for EPP ports, but it still doesn't approach 
Iomega's claim of 60meg/min for SCSI.  I wish I hadn't been forced to 
make this sacrifice, but oh well.  A Zip with *both* parallel and SCSI 
would be great, as would a cheap (under $150) internal model with either 
a SCSI (preferred) or IDE interface.  If something like this comes out, 
I may just buy it and have the best of both worlds.

cheers,
mike