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: Cogito who wrote (47875)	2/14/1998 1:40:00 PM
From: Kel Suga	Respond to of 58324

Allen...enjoyed your post. I did read MacPherson's post and will be skipping his comments from now--I don't bother reading posts from people like Rocky, etc... I'm not an IOM fanatic, but I do believe that they've got good products---people can say all they want to say about Iomega being a "dog." This "dog" has managed to allow me to retire and live off of the profits taken and also for the multifold increase in my current portfolio. Here's hoping that the people that manage Iomega can continue to increase revenue and profits with their current and new products--nothing ventured, nothing gained. I used to work for a company that produced tape media and know that the technology to produce the zip disks are the same and that they can produce the media in a continuous web form and the cost per disk is minimal. Regards, Kel-

To: Cogito who wrote (47875)	2/14/1998 1:47:00 PM
From: stock bull	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

Allen, I read your entire posting with great interest. Thanks for taking the time to post the facts, not some biased point of view. From the details contained in your posting, I must conclude that you work in the industry, and may be a design engineer. Again, thanks for taking the time to post the facts. Do you have any comments on how you view IOM as an investment? Stock Bull

To: Cogito who wrote (47875)	2/14/1998 4:37:00 PM
From: Edward Ip	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 58324

I guess you left out two big advantages. Compatibility issues, and the brand name recognition. As history has proven, high and more superior technology doesn't equal to better sale in the computer industry. You don't agree with that huh? Take a close look between Mac and IBM. Mac OS and the Win 95. As everyone in the industry knows that Mac has a much better product both in reliability and performance, but then again we know which one the market has picked. Mac had plug & play technology pretty ever since a little less than 10 years ago. And when Win 95 came out and it's bragging about the PnP technology that it stole from Mac. And the long files names, Mac had that so many years ago. But outside of the fact the Mac is more advance, but as you can see that we picked Win 95/IBM systems. Because WE NEED THE COMPATIBILIY, and the word of mouth is very very important. The next important factor is about marketing. Iom is doing a GREAT job at marketing the product. And that has been proven by the 11 million users that IOM has. Another example: Microsoft is probably better at marketing their product than making it work. Look at Windows 95, there were able to make it the hottest selling software. But they can't even get it up and running. Correction, they can't get it up and running without crashing every other 15 minutes. Can't believe that? Go to some newsgroup and read up on the complaints that people have on WIn 95. Still don't believe, heard of MSN(MSFT Network), they have so many problems with staying up online and running, you can read that they have one of the lowest rating by many different magazines, due to its problems with reliability issues. If you haven't figure it out yet, MSN is own by MSFT, and they use 100% MSFT only product. Hey, if they can't even keep its own products up and running. How good is it? Yes, Maybe Syquest has a better technology, but the brand name recognition that it's lack of. Iom has a much better advantage over SYQT. Amazing you are still reading this? Really have that much patience huh?

To: Cogito who wrote (47875)	2/15/1998 12:58:00 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

All - I have an additional remark to add to my post yesterday about Iomega's technology, and one minor correction. The additional remark: I forgot to mention that the "breakthrough" SparQ drive from SyQuest uses thin-film media, just like SyJet and just like Jaz. Basically, the SparQ does not represent any kind of technological advance. It's just a cheaply made Jaz, with cheaply made media. I'm not knocking it as a product. As I have said many times, it's a great deal. The correction: Magneto-Resistive disk media and heads were developed by IBM in 1991, not the 80's as I said. I believe that the concept of MR was first discussed in the late 80's, but the first working prototype drives using them were demonstrated in 1991. Most hard drives today still use thin-film media and heads. Just wanted to be complete and accurate. - Allen