Message-Id: <mailto:199502141429.IAA29625@library.wustl.edu> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 09:08:10 -0500 From: David Y Allen <mailto:DYALLEN@CCMAIL.SUNYSB.EDU> Subject: Syquist versus Bernoulli To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB
State University of New York at Stony Brook
Stony Brook, NY 11794-3331
David Y Allen
Library-Reference
516 632-7110
14-Feb-1995 08:51am EST
FROM: DYALLEN
TO: Remote Addressee ( mailto:_imagelib@listserv.arizona.edu )
Subject: Syquist versus Bernoulli
William Hammack writes that he is considering the purchase of a Syquist
270 mb drive for transporting large image files. I did some investigation of
Syquist drives, and finally opted for an Iomega Bernoulli 230 drive, although I
am not sure I made the right decision. I am curious what other people have to
say.
Here is what I learned: Syquist drives are somewhat faster than
Bernoulli drives, and seem to be more frequently used by service bureaus. On
the other hand, Bernoulli drives are more reliable because they are not prone
to "head crashes." Also, Syquist drives require the additional purchase of a
SCSI interface, which raises the cost considerably, and apparently do not work
with both Macs and PCs. Using a SCSI interface, Bernoulli drives can be used
with both platforms. Also, Iomega has an option which allows you to transfer
information from one PC to another through the parallel port--thus avoiding the
need for the SCSI interface. It was a close call, but on the basis of the
above I decided to place my money on a Bernoulli. I have not actually used
either drive, including my recently purchased Bernoulli.