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: Steve Wiz who wrote (39739)	12/13/1997 3:34:00 PM
From: Lurker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

Greetings All: * Regarding Backward-compatibility: * I have seen 2 types of backward-compatibility in the last few years: 1. Same size disk, greater capacity - The market likes this. People wanted to upgrade from 300K to 600K to 1200K with their 5 1/4" disks. Likewise, people wanted to upgrade from 720K to 1440K with their 3 1/2" disks. 2. Different sized disks - The market seems to shun these. While combo drives that could handle both 5 1/4" and 3 1/2" drives were available, people preferred 2 separate drives. Very, very few computers sold with the combo drives. 99+% sold with one of each drive. Conclusion: The Zip has little to fear from a competitor's backward compatibility. In fact, I think backward compatibility would be a detriment. I would personally pay a little more for a 1.44 drive and a zip drive on the same machine, rather than pay a little less for a combo 1.44 & zip drive. * Regarding Generic Disks: * I think this is an area where Iomega is vulnerable. 1. I have trouble seeing how the judge could automatically rule in Iomega's favor. I think the ruling could go either way. A. Iomega previousely stated that they have the right to cooperate with Noumai to make and sell Syquest disks. B. Generic parts are often used in equipment. We can easily get generic brake pads for our cars. There are a host of similiar cases in the computer industry. While I would prefer that the judge would rule in our favor so that IOM will maintain it's upward rolling pattern, I prefer the availabilty of generic products. I re-ink my ink-jet cartridges in my printer. I use a third party trackball with my computer, etc. 2. However, even if the judge rules in Noumai's favor, I think their penetration will be minimal. A. Iomega will probably declare that any warranty is null and void if a Noumai disk is used. It would be unenforceable. But, it would inhibit competition. B. I don't think many people would want to risk a whole 100Megs of info on a generic disk. C. Iomega has already stated that they have forseen the problem and have ways to make non-Iomega disks unworkable, if necessary (a la what nintendo did to 3rd party game makers with their first machine). Heh, heh, heh, isn't owning (part of) a business fun? Mike

To: Steve Wiz who wrote (39739)	12/14/1997 4:13:00 PM
From: AreWeThereYet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 58324

Steve, the failure of LS-120 is because of its poor marketing. Backward compatibility reduced peripheral counts in a PC and grant LS-120 a $20 to $25 price advantage over Zip. But the problem is lack of a portable version in early release and not publicly available until recent (before we can only get it from Compaq like the 2.88MB from IBM) and with a relatively high price tag. So far HiFD should have enough fundamental to be the next-gen floppy but we'll see how is it priced and market to the industry. aC