| ▲ | timbit42 2 days ago | |
When Zip drives hit the market, I already had a SyQuest drive and the Zip drive didn't have much more capacity and its parallel interface was slower than my computer's SCSI interface. I assumed Zip disks would be less reliable than hard disks, as floppy disks had been. The SyQuest had a real hard drive platter in it so you knew it was robust. The Zip platter was harder than a floppy but softer than a hard drive, so you knew it wasn't as robust. So I had no incentive to buy into Zip. I saw a few people use them but I assumed they'd never heard of SyQuest and didn't know better. I never had anyone ask for data on a Zip disk or want to give me data on a Zip disk, so I never bothered. Later when the click-of-death started happening, I figured it would die off and people would switch to SyQuest, but then there was Jaz, which wasn't as popular as Zip, and then CD-ROM took over, which held a lot of data, but was still slow (in spite of IDE) and still not as robust as the SyQuest products. In 1998, at their end, SyQuest had a 4.7 GB unit, I presume to compete with DVD. | ||
| ▲ | jasomill 2 days ago | parent [-] | |
SyQuest and Iomega were both founded in the early '80s and introduced their first removable disk products in 1982, and both introduced cost-reduced consumer-oriented drives in 1995 (EZ135 and Zip, respectively). IIRC, Iomega captured the consumer market with the Zip drive for mostly business reasons (better marketing, contracts with major retailers and PC OEMs, etc.). | ||