The parallel port scsi interface is 2.5 oz and fits in the palm of your hand. No, the performance through the adapter is not the same as that of native SCSI, but is every bit as fast as the parallel port versions of the Zip or EZ drives
If you're going to do a side by side comparison and present conclusions about the speed difference, then you should also do a comparison using SCSI II devices. The Syquest 270 meg drive I have is a SCSI II device. When I use it with a parallel port scsi adapter, I have the typical parallel port bottleneck, but when I use it with a regular scsi controller, I have a performance boost of over 50%. The reason you will not see this performance difference between the Zip parallel and Zip SCSI is because the access rate and sustained transfer rate of the Zip drive is slow compared to that of the Syquest products.
I'm not saying that I don't like the Zip, I like it, its cheap and the stock is making me money. I will start using a Zip sometime in the near future when a client asks me if he can give me files on Zip media. Until then, I'll stick with my Syquest SQ3270, 270meg, 13.5ms access time removable drive. When I hook it up to my laptop I'll get the slower performance of using the SCSI parallel port adapter, but heck, I have TOTAL TRANSPORTABILITY! Just like you said.
Jimmy
Long on Iomega |
