Re: Flopticals (was Re: Test!)

[toddpw@ugcs.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel)]

david@uow.edu.au (David Wilson) writes:

>swhite@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu (Steve White) writes:
>>Yup, I had two flopticals, and both died about a month after their
>>warranty did. I resolved never to buy an Iomega product again, and so far,
>>I haven't.

>Both my Flopticals are INSITE branded (one in a PLI case, the other a bare
>drive). What did Iomega have to do with Flopticals (did they just package
>them like PLI did)?

Insite developed the original 20MB technology, and made mechanisms (which had
less than stellar reliability -- I know, I bought a PLI one and returned it,
then a Tulin unit which I still have and it mostly worked the last time I
tried it, which was about the time I got my first Zip drive).

Iomega licensed the floptical technology and made their own drives. These
appear to have been cash cowed to get the Zip drive technology out the door.
For all Iomega's screwups, the Zip drives were a heck of a lot more rugged
and user-friendly than any other removable disk system I've come in contact
with. Sometimes I wonder if the "click of death" problems come from people
abusing their Zips without really noticing. It is the curse of supposedly
rugged technology that people will completely beat the hell out of it.

Anyway, Insite appears to have done a lousy job making money on their own
technology. I supose Iomega-bashers might claim that was Iomega's fault,
but I myself haven't seen any evidence of this -- then again, I ignored
the market until about the time the Zip really took off, so I might have
missed it.

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ ugcs.caltech.edu