[712] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
CD-ROM DRIVES
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (P.T. NICHOLLS)
Fri Jul 10 12:54:06 1992
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 11:46:26 CDT
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
From: "P.T. NICHOLLS" <35007_3420@uwovax.uwo.ca>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L%UHUPVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Please respond to the author, not PACS-L. Thanks, Dana
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Which CD-ROM drives have proven to be the most satisfactory and
which ones are the dogs? This is a quick survey on the basic
functionality and reliability of CD-ROM drives currently in use.
(Cross-posted a bit, I'm afraid) Since I need this information for
the third edition of my CD-ROM Collection Builder's Toolkit book
(deadline in seven weeks!) the results will be posted here by the
end of this month. Please let me know what you think about the
BASIC FUNCTIONALITY & RELIABILITY of your CD-ROM drive(s) by
sending the following four pieces of data to: ptn@uwovax.uwo.ca
MAKE (e.g. NEC)
MODEL (e.g. CDR-36M)
NUMBER (how many you've got, whether in towers, chained or alone)
RATING: 1 -- in shop all the time / major problems
2 -- in shop too often or performance inadequate
3 -- OK / does job -- maybe we could do better next time
4 -- pretty good / may well buy again
5 -- no complaints
Feel free to rate at 3.5, 4.75 etc., but the end result will be
just a rough RANKING of the various drives according to their basic
functionality and reliability, not precise scores. It will be most
convenient if responses are on single lines such as:
NEC CDR-36M 10 4.5
But if you want to explain or tell good/bad stories or whatever,
and dont mind these being in quoted in print later, feel free to do
so as well. Hope to let you know what the general feelings are in
a few weeks. Thanks, Paul Nicholls ptn@uwovax.uwo.ca
