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 : Iomega Thread without Iomega -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BBG who wrote (9922)	5/14/1999 11:28:00 AM
From: Cameron Dorey	Respond to of 10072

What a quiet day on this thread... The whole market's tanking (particularly everything I have an interest in), so the bulls are sitting back and frantically planning damage control, and IOM is just sitting there, so the bears (and the jerks) don't have anything to taunt with. Just a small observation. Cameron "In a country as big as the United States, you can find 50 examples of *anything*." (not to mention the world)

To: BBG who wrote (9922)	5/14/1999 11:49:00 AM
From: Zakrosian	Respond to of 10072

Have you considered something else when evaluating the cost/mb. of compact flash? Everytime you use your card the cost goes down... i.e. Say I've used my 32mb card 10 times... I processed 320mb of data so the cost per goes down each time I use the card... It may be a bit of a stretch to see it that way but I think that view has some validity when calculating the long term cost of compactflash memory.... An interesting perspective, but isn't that true of Clik! disks as well? But your main point is still valid: how many digital camera users will need more than about 320mb of storage at any given time? However, as Allen pointed out, images are requiring more memory as time goes on, the corresponding increase in quality may generate more demand for digital cameras, and that 320mb may very well prove to be inadequate. I don't know how representative I am, but if I ever go digital, my requirement would be the equivalent of about 10-12 rolls of film. Though I don't know whether I'd go for Clik! over compact flash.

To: BBG who wrote (9922)	5/14/1999 11:49:00 AM
From: David Harker	Respond to of 10072

Cost/Use: >Have you considered something else when evaluating the cost/mb. >of compact flash? Everytime you use your card the cost goes down... > i.e. Say I've used my 32mb card 10 times... I processed 320mb >of data so the cost per goes down each time I use the card. Duh. Same argument applies to each time you re-use a Zip/Clik/Jaz disk. All these various storage choices are reusable.

To: BBG who wrote (9922)	5/14/1999 12:33:00 PM
From: Pacing The Cage	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10072

I think that people are forgetting the prime selling points. Convenience and familiarity. We can get too caught up with the cost/Mb arguments (which are valid, and should be discussed) and forget about what motivates most people. I have friends that own Sony Mavica cameras, not because they are the highest quality available, but because they save the pictures onto a floppy disk for them. They are accustomed to the idea of film. You shoot a roll, take the exposed 'film' out and drop it into your pocket then reload and do it again. They LIKE the idea and security of keeping disks with pictures of little Bubba in their drawer at home, just like they do with all of those pictures from years ago that they have in the closet. It feels natural to them. They also LIKE the idea of not running out of 'film' while they are off on vacation, and if they happen to run low on 'film', they can just run down to the local grocery or drugstore and buy more. If the pictures of Clik! disk packaging that have been posted here in the past are accurate, I can picture them hanging on the little peg next to the 35mm film down at the local drugstore and looking like they belong there. I believe that this is the real strength behind Clik! -Ken