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: slipnsip who wrote (51708)	4/1/1998 10:21:00 AM
From: Ben Antanaitis	Respond to of 58324

David, It also needs an IRQ that many new systems do not have available. Ben A.

To: slipnsip who wrote (51708)	4/1/1998 12:56:00 PM
From: John Alan Wallace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

Question to all, Today I put in an order to sell 1000 IOM on E-trade. Normally when I put in an order to sell something I own the screen has a statement that says something to the effect of "You have XXXX uncommitted shares in your account". This time it came back and said something to the effect "Your account is overcommitted by 1000 shares, this transaction will not be posted to your portfolio records.......". None of my IOM shares were committed by me at that time. Later today I cancelled that order and put in an order to sell at a slightly lower price and I got the standard "You have XXXX uncommitted shares in your account". Is this a glitch in the E-trade systems or would the second message show if my shares had been loaned out to short? If it reflects that my shares were loaned to short and did not show the next time, could it be when you put in a limit order to sale your shares have to be recalled from the loan to short? If so, what would happen if everyone put in an order to sale their IOM at a limit order of $15 or so? Thanks for your help. JW

To: slipnsip who wrote (51708)	4/1/1998 4:21:00 PM
From: AreWeThereYet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 58324

David and Ben, >> Lets not forget about the SCSI card that needs to be purchased and installed before you can use most CDR's. To complicated for most users. << >> It also needs an IRQ that many new systems do not have available. << Well, if you can install a SCSI Zip, then you can install a SCSI CDR too. Not to mention that EIDE CDR/CDRW drive now getting very popular and affordable. Most CDR/CDRW are PnP including my HP 7100i EIDE CD-RW. Extra IRQ??? I don't even aware which IRQ my EIDE CDRW using because it done flawlessly by Win95. OOPS, my mistake, it actually doesn't require a IRQ at all because it is using EIDE! Now, don't be confused by the idea that CDR can replace Zip/LS120/HiFD. They are for different purpose. Burning a CD is much easier than before but it sill requires more preparation than using a floppy or Zip/LS120/HiFD. This will remain true until kernel support of UDF is available. Brendan: >> Is there anyone who thinks this trend will reverse again, and if so why? << The trend is not reversed, Zip install base is still growing but as LS120 product ramped up, now you see the first material competitor. GW2k's LS120 + 2 disks upgrade is $69 while Zip + 2 disks is $99 because LS120 will save you the cost of a 1.44MB floppy. If HiFD will deliver what Sony promise on time and at similar price then Zip is really in a bad position. For now Zip is still the king of the hill. Rocky: Can you please stop using the term "HiFi"? aC