jaz vs sparq
Read this exchange between two users:
"Topic:
sparq vs.jazz (1 of 2), Read 24 times
Conf:
Storage
Date:
Sunday, August 02, 1998 09:50 AM
I installed an external parallel sparq. The drive worked, but on
backing up I constantly got messages, "unable to write to disc
data will be lost". I scanned the sparq discs with norton disc
doctor and found numerous dead areas. This was present on 3
discs. Thus I think the quality of the sparq discs is terrible. Has
anyone had good results with jazz discs?
TOP | Post | Reply | Reply/Quote | Email Reply | Delete | Edit
Previous | Next | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Topic:
sparq vs.jazz (2 of 2), Read 26 times
Conf:
Storage
Date:
Sunday, August 02, 1998 09:39 PM
According to CDW technical support, the SparQ drives are
plagued with trouble, both internal and external. They
recommend going with the Jaz 2GB. I returned my internal
SparQ after it "dumped" 500MB of data from one second to the
next. The CDW tech. said I was the third person this happened
to today, the day I spoke with him. Since, you can't beat the
price per megabyte of the SparQ and the performance, it was
difficult for me to decide which way to go. The Jaz cost/MB is
nearly 2x. I didn't need removable storage, so I went with a
second hard drive, the Seagate 9.1GB Medalist Pro. It cost only
$40 more than I paid for the internal SparQ & a 3-pack of
cartridges.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Loren" |
