Some more interesting viewpoints on the Sony HiFD drive Recall from the AOL MF board:
______________________________________________________________________
The flop of Sony's SuperFloppy is great news.....for the LS-120. They seem to have dropped the ball more times than the Jets did yesterday.
As Sony was preparing for the release of their drive, I had commented that competing backward compatible drives were good for IOM as it split up the competition, making it more difficult to garner a strong foothold. I was not afraid of Sony and looked forward, to some extent, to their participation in the market, which, I believed, would fracture and divide the backward-compatible crowd.
The theory is similar to politics...the incumbent always wants as many other parties in the race as possible to split up the anti-incumbent vote.
While on the surface it seems that the departure of Sony from the game is great for Iomega, no doubt for an extended period due to this being an engineering problem, it is even better news for the LS-120.
The best case scenario would have been for Sony to be out there on the market, squeaking along with 2-5% market share and techie problems, grabbing sales from the LS-120.
Paradoxically, I'm sorry that Sony bailed out so quickly
______________________________________________________________________
With the news of Sony's HiFD recall and lame sell-through, my hat is off to Xxxx, who engaged me in a long discussion via IM eight or ten months ago regarding his speculation that flexible media in the HiFd would invite head crashes as it spun up to speed. As I recall the conversations now, he clearly anticipated that the dual-head system Sony employed in making the machine "backwards-compatible" was an engineering liability with respect to surface deflection. In a way that longtime readers here will appreciate, it was obvious that Xxxx was torturing the design in his head, trying to resolve its numerous complications. To his credit, he pronounced the drive an unworkable "kluge" long before Sony's VP bailed out.
Shortly after those conversations, Xxxx began his long campaign to challenge Sony's claim that the unit could handle both random floppies and the faster-spinning HiFD media -- results of which Xxxx and others reported here when Sony began public demonstrations of the product.
Looks like you were right on, buddy. Nice call.
_____________________________________________________________________
Xxxx, who will see negative in anything said:
<<Paradoxically, I'm sorry that Sony bailed out so quickly.>>
They didn't bail, they will be back. And the media made it like Sony would be the end of Iomega. Which would make you more happy, Sony bailing or doing very well and taking market share? The LS-120 has proven it will never have more than a tiny market. Sony had the potential, but they just suck with this product.
This is great news for Iomega. Either way, there is no real competition. IF IT CAN'T READ A ZIP, IT IS USELESS. IF SONY CAME OUT WITH A 750 MEG DRIVE BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE WITH ZIP DISKS, I WOULD BE SCARED. But for now, Iomega owns removable storage.
______________________________________________________________________
I have long been of the opinion that those with a need for a high capacity floppy drive are savvy enough to do the requisite research and that most would choose a Zip, either as an after market purchase or consciously as a Zip-built-in when purchasing a new system. I believe that most retail purchasers of Zips-built-in select their system based less on the need for high capacity removable storage than the other features included with the system. If retail consumers can get an integrated Zip or Superdisk with their system, well that's just fine by most. However, most consumers do not understand the need for removable storage, and do not base their buying decision on the inclusion (or lack of) a high capacity floppy drive.
I have argued privately that the winner of any war to replace the legacy floppy drive would be the manufacturer successful in getting their drive in the OEM box. I believe the new standard, if there is to be one, can and will be foisted on an unknowing and indifferent retail consumer. In a market where the profit potential is in the disks, the installed base of drives is everything.
Again, (not to belittle Xxxxxxxxxx's vast intellect) I believe an intelligent consumer with the need for a high capacity floppy will choose Zip over the competition. Those who do not have the same need may receive with their computer purchase a Zip, a Superdisk, or neither. I submit that those in the former category (those with a demonstrable need) will consume disks. Those in the latter category may consume disks, but certainly at a much slower rate.
It is generally assumed (and I agree) that the Superdisk's manufacturing cost is higher than that of Zip. And Sony's HiFD likely has a manufacturing cost similar to the Superdisk.
As recently posted, it makes sense that we may have seen the last of the HiFD.
If Compaq is displacing Zip with Superdisk in some of its models it is clear they must be getting them at a price where the drive manufacturer is breaking even, at best. This will certainly move many OEM Superdisk drives at the expense of Zip. But again, I suspect that Superdisk disk purchases do not necessarily follow. Ambition will not have the disk sales volume needed to offset the loss on the drives. Superdisk inclusion is a minor obstacle that will soon pass when Imation throws in the towel.
Neither the Superdisk nor the HiFD represent competition in the true sense of the word.
______________________________________________________________________
Xxxxx writes:
<<Neither the Superdisk nor the HiFD represent competition in the true sense of the word.>>
I think that they represent competition for each other...competition for those in search of a backwards removable drive. Thus, the death of one, is a benefit to the other. In this respect, "competition" is healthy for Iomega.
Given the long term objective of making Zip ubiquitous, that it should be available not only in computers but in projectors, scanners, printers, etc., it was better to see LS-120 have competition from Sony.
Fundamentally, if we have a choice between the two possibilities below, I would rather see the second as I think it lends itself better to the utopian ideal of standardization:
Option 1: IOM has 80% market share and Imation has 20%
Option 2: IOM has 75% market share, and two or more backwards removable drives divvy up the remainder.
While it is true that in Option 2 IOM has lower overall market share, that is a short term thing if one were still looking for the Holy Grail of 1 to 1 inclusion.
======================================================================
This final one is more related to Castlewood's upcoming ORB "Jaz killer" and the LS-120, but I found it to be an interesting viewpoint:
<<As to ORB, it has the potential to strike at Jaz profitability. Maybe Castlewood has learned something from Syquest's demise. This should become clear in the next few months. >>
Or, maybe Castlewood (ORB) was aced out by IOM on the purchase of SYQT's patents and is left with the same problems SYQT had.
As for the LS-120 or HiFD, I can count the number of times I needed backward compatibility for 1.44 Mb floppies in the last year on one finger. And even that one time I used a 1.44 floppy was to load drivers that I could have easily gotten over the net. I have not received a diskette in the mail for more than a year. Virtually all of the software that I, or my company own comes on CD.
How do we back up? Zips. How do we get large files to the printing shop? Zips.
______________________________________________________________________
Dave |
