Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Any info about Iomega (IOM)? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rocky Reid who wrote (32950)	10/22/1997 11:43:00 AM
From: Gary Wisdom	Respond to of 58324

Whooooosh. Know what that sound is? It's the sound of the shorts getting squeezed. $29.375

To: Rocky Reid who wrote (32950)	10/22/1997 11:43:00 AM
From: Linda Pearson	Respond to of 58324

29 1/2 at 11:41 am et!!!!

To: Rocky Reid who wrote (32950)	10/22/1997 11:45:00 AM
From: Teddy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

Gee Rocky, i guess you have a point there..... I can't believe how stupid Iomega is to spend all that time and money developing a product that will never work! Iomega is doomed to drift down to the single digits<VBG>

To: Rocky Reid who wrote (32950)	10/22/1997 11:49:00 AM
From: Frank Drumond	Respond to of 58324

>I'm rather dismayed by the lack of response to my technical question.< Rock, your power issue just doesn't have merit. People use VCRs and cameras with motorized film advance all the time. I can't believe the spinning a 2" disk for 1 or 2 secs burns batteries any faster than winding the film on a cheap 35 mm point & shoot camera.

To: Rocky Reid who wrote (32950)	10/22/1997 11:51:00 AM
From: steve goff	Respond to of 58324

With n.hand being "center stage at Comdex", I trust that the details have been worked out with the prototypes that went to OEMs, and the resulting modifications both hardware and software. Sometimes you just got to believe that management is doing their job. So far, KE has been on-track.

To: Rocky Reid who wrote (32950)	10/22/1997 12:44:00 PM
From: FuzzFace	Respond to of 58324

<I'm rather dismayed by the lack of response to my technical question. This is a most important legitimate question that must be asked before all of the RAH RAH RAH about no.hand can be continued. Does adopting no.hand mean that cameras would have to format each no.hand disc with a common OS (Win95)?> We're addressing it now, right? IOMEGANs can RAH RAH RAH n-hand, just as you do SYQT's vaperware. I don't see any difference. No. It is possible for the n-hand to have it's own file system. Then both PC and MAC would have to be taught (via software) to understand it. OR, they could use an existing file system (such as FAT16, the most common) and PC's would need no new software. They don't need a whole OS in the camera, just enough instructions to read and write the files using the file system decided on. The disks could be pre-formatted, like Zip is. Let's keep Operating Systems and File Systems straight. An O/S utilizes a F/S to move data to and from storage devices. When a device has been setup to use a particular F/S, it is stuck using that F/S until the next time the setup program is run. DOS and successor systems use FDISK to setup a disk into FAT16 partition(s). Win95 OSR2 added FAT32 support. Win NT added NTFS support via the Disk Administrator utility. IBM's OS/2 added HPFS. But any O/S can be taught to use any F/S. It's just a matter of whether the O/S vendor is willing to commit the resources to it. But it's always just an add-on (service pack, or whatever MAC calls them) away.