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.

Technology Stocks : SYQUEST -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D VanSwol who wrote (7170)	9/30/1998 5:55:00 PM
From: Robert E. Bruss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7685

"Then why are they rated so high in computer magazines?" ================= Boy, that'll open a can of worms if anything will. Any of those companies producing that highly rated stuff ever spend money for advertising, give away stuff at comdex, have parties? Any of those writers pay their own money for the stuff they review, and then live with it for months or years? Maybe in a parallel universe. I am definitely NOT referring to Syquest in particular, just making some general observations and offering a little food for thought.

To: D VanSwol who wrote (7170)	9/30/1998 9:50:00 PM
From: Moe B. Loney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7685

Moe said, >> To many problems with Syquest's technology.<< D VanSwol said, "Then why are they rated so high in computer magazines?" Moe said, Oh my! Are we a bit wet behind the ears Mr. VanSwol? First of all, and this can be verified by Ziff-Davis, the review is conducted with the model that Syquest sends to the company. Now ask yourself this. . . Would Syquest send them a dud? No. Then consider that the test is done over a few hours. . . not months. HUGE difference. I hope you are never forced to restore data from a Syquest cartridge. If you are, I hope you have more than one copy on a second cartridge because there is a good chance the one of them will be bad. I've been there many times. Moe