interesting FAQ, and advert :^)
for a measly $30 you get twice the speed and an extra 30MB. HowQuote:>***SECTION 10: IOMEGA ZIP vs SYQUEST EZ135
>SyQuest has released a new drive called the "EZ135" (formerly known by
>its code name, "Roadrunner"). This drive costs ~$230 for an external
>version (~$200 for an internal version) and uses ~$25 cartridges that
>store 135-MB each. EZ135 weighs about 2 lbs (twice as much as the
>diet-conscious Zip), but is also about twice as fast.
>There are many mixed messages about which drive will ultimately prevail.
>However, I personally feel that the Zip drive will be the winner for
>several reasons. Here's why:
>* The Zip drive is cheaper. Zip costs $200 for external, while EZ135 is
can the ZIP compete with that?
Furthermore, the Zip drive is now available
internally from >Power Computing and soon as an end-user installation kit, and
chances are >it will cost considerably less than the EZ135's internal price of
$200.>* Zip cartridges are smaller, lighter, and more transportable. EZ135's
has a substantial market lead over SyQuest. Historically >speaking, the MacQuote:>cartridges need to be stored in the same sort of padded carrying case as
>"standard" SyQuest cartridges, making then considerably more bulky to
>transport. As a result, you'll likely see less of them being used with
>portable computers and, consequently, with desktop machines.>* Zip already
market hasn't had much in the way of brand-loyalty. >SyQuest drives became the
pre* standard not because of any >outstanding features, but simply
because they were cheap in comparison to >the more expensive Bernoulli drives.
Similarly, the Zip is cheaper than >EZ135.
but if people compare the speed, storage space? an extra 300MB per 10 disks is
nothing to sneeze at!
Power Computing's Mac >clones (and hopefully -- eventually -- Apple's ownQuote:>* The Zip is being offered as optional equipment in
products), whereas the >EZ135 is not. This has the potential to give the Zip
drive an even larger >market share.
what 'everything else'? people may not _need_ the speed, but I think they willQuote:>* Though EZ135 is faster, Zip is already fast enough for the majority of
>users. QuickTime movies, sound files, and similar time-intensive files
>play just fine from Zip. Only a comparatively few users will actually
>_need_ the additional speed that EZ135 offers, and when you consider this
>in relation to everything else, the EZ135's speed becomes a
_want_ it :^)
true, but >is that enough to justify a more expensive, heavier drive?Quote:>* EZ135 cartridges hold about 30-MB more data after formatting,
I generally don't walk around with my drives :^)
I don't think >so. Again, the fact that the Zip is so easily transportable
makes it the >better drive, regardless of the data storage capacity. If
SyQuest's new >drive were to hold, say, 200-MB or more it would be a
considerably >different story.
lower capacity? only the 5-1/4" 44MB and 88MB, everything else is over 100MBQuote:>* People may be angry at SyQuest for "holding out" on the community. More
>than a few users have wondered out loud why SyQuest didn't introduce the
>EZ135 before Zip came on the scene. The most logical answer is that
>SyQuest was making so much money off its other, lower-capacity drives
"more than a few users"? I haven't heard ANY users even mention it, quiteQuote:>that they didn't want to rock the boat by introducing the EZ135. Only
>when Iomega started severely cutting into SyQuest's market did SyQuest
>respond with the EZ135. In short, it seems that SyQuest was more
>interested in lining its own pockets instead of advancing the technology.
>While this is probably good for business, it doesn't make the users any
let me guess. you own stock :^)Quote:>It's ultimately a simple matter of time deciding which drive will
>prevail, but if I had to place money on the outcome, I'd bet on Zip.
now this is a good thing! on my Xmas wish list!Quote:>- - - - -
>***SECTION 11: IOMEGA JAZ-THE NEXT GENERATION
wonder how Syquest will respond?