Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usenet
From: gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu (Garance A. Drosehn)
Subject: Re: CD-ROM Drives
Message-ID: <_k=lqkq@rpi.edu>
Nntp-Posting-Host: eclipse.its.rpi.edu
References: <1769@toaster.SFSU.EDU>
Date: 21 Jun 91 16:47:20 GMT
Lines: 111

In article <1769@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes:
> I think the recent postings in the thread really miss the mark.
> First of all, there's tremendous resentment among early adopters
> of NeXT's "future software will only be available on floppy"
> policy, and being forced to purchase floppy drives for their
> ODful systems in order to continue using them--drives that often
> don't work well and are fairly expensive--and not even being
> given the option to use the FD controller on the '040 upgrades
> they were all but "forced" to buy.  The *last* thing in the
> world they want to see is NeXT commit to yet-another-incompatible
> storage medium.

The mistake was the "future software will only be available on floppy"  
decision.  I've had problems with the floppy drives too, and I can't imagine  
how you can possibly list that as a reason to *stay* with floppy drives.  I  
don't think NeXT should completely abandon floppy distributions, but I  
personally would much rather get distributions on CD-ROM.

> Very few people in the Bay Area seem terribly interested in
> CD-ROM for a variety of reasons (in no particular order):
> + bad experiences with Apple and Sun CD products

Must be the bay area.  I've had great success with Apple CD products.   
Certainly better success than I've had with NeXT floppy distributions.  I don't  
do anything with Suns, but I know that the guys here who do are very keen on  
getting CD-ROM drives for those machines.

> + slow

It isn't faster than a hard drive, but if you're comparing it to *floppies*  
then it isn't too bad.

> + not user-writable

That's actually one of the reasons that I *want* distributions on CD-ROM!  It'd  
be great to know that I have absolutely pristine versions of the distribution  
files available.  I can concentrate my backups on just those files that won't  
be on a CD-ROM, which means I could probably have complete backups by using  
nothing but the CD-ROM distribution and a handful of floppies.

> + relatively expensive hardware

Mac's manage to get CD-ROM players for $500.  That isn't all that bad.  (in my  
situation it would be particularly nice if NeXT's and Macs could use the same  
CD-ROM drive, of course :-).

> + large disparity between CD manufacturing cost and "fair market
>   price" compared with just about any other storage media

That is purely a decision of the person selling the CD.  If NeXT wanted to  
distribute CD-ROM's for $20 they could do it and make a profit at it.  Compare  
that to the cost of 20 of these damn 2.88 meg floppies.  20 floppies holds less  
than 60 meg.  The ETO I received in the mail today has 484 Meg used up (and 150  
meg "free", as if you could use it...).  I'd *hate* to get that much info on  
floppies.

I don't care about the disparity between the manufacturing costs and the market  
price, what I care about is the market price.

> + most "interesting" CD-ROMs "out there" are tied to software
>   that only runs on MSDOS or Mac OS

Gee, I wonder if that just *might* be because MSDOS and Macs *use* CD-ROM's,  
while NeXT doesn't officially recognize that the medium exists.  You're not  
going to solve this problem by avoiding CD-ROM's!

Why are more CD-ROM's showing up on Macs?  Because Apple is pushing CD-ROMs for  
their major distributions (such as A/UX, ETO and "d e v e l o p").  That causes  
people to buy the CD-ROM players, and that creates a viable market for those  
who want to press "interesting" CD-ROMs.  And Apple has certainly done a good  
enough job with ETO that it justified the purchase of a CD-ROM drive.  

Surely NeXT could do the same.

> + unattractive licensing terms have become the norm with CD-ROM
>   products

Again, that's a problem with the person writing the license, it isn't a problem  
with the medium.  Nobody is going to force NeXT to write up horrible licensing  
terms if NeXT decides to distribute things on CD-ROM drives.

Note that the topic under debate is the distribution of large amounts of data.   
I see no advantage of distributing things via piles of floppies instead of one  
(or two?  :-) CD-ROM's.  I think NeXT had the right idea with the original  
optical drives except that the method was a bit too expensive.  Ideally the  
distribution would be on something that both an optical drive and a CD-ROM  
drive could read, because CD-ROM's aren't the ultimate answer to everything  
either.  But barring that option, I'd much rather have a CD-ROM distribution  
than stacking up floppies all around my office.

Of course, I do believe that NeXT would have to continue to make distributions  
available on floppy too, because people should not be forced to buy a CD-ROM  
drive (not yet, at least).  I like CD-ROM distributions for a number of  
reasons, but it wouldn't be right for NeXT to first force everyone to get  
floppy drives and immediately turn around and force everyone to get CD-ROM  
drives.

> Now if NeXT wants to offer software on Exabyte 8200 cartridges,
> I'm listening.  :-)

How much to Exabyte drives cost?  How fast are they?  How reliable are they?   
Can you mount an Exabyte and navigate thru it using all the same tools as you  
use for a hard disk?

(I'm not being sarcasic in the above paragraph, I don't know the answers to any  
of those questions and they might be interesting to know).

 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -
Garance Alistair Drosehn   = gad@rpi.edu  or  gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
ITS Systems Programmer                       (handles NeXT-type mail)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute;  Troy NY  USA
