Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!dino!atanasoff!jwright
From: jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Connor Peripherals
Message-ID: <1700@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu>
Date: 27 Oct 89 17:44:36 GMT
References: <1843@eric.mpr.ca> <1695@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu> <1846@eric.mpr.ca>
Reply-To: jwright@atanasoff.UUCP (Jim Wright)
Organization: Iowa State U. Computer Science Department, Ames, IA
Lines: 21

In article <1846@eric.mpr.ca> hui@mprgate.mpr.ca  (Michael M.Y. Hui) writes:
| I did read the technical manual rather thoroughly and remember that
| Connor drives can withstand any orientation, as long as the
| orientation does not change too quickly.

Interesting.  All drives I have encountered had three legitimate orientations:
flat, side or other side.  (Hope you get the idea. :-)  This drive has been
mounted the same way since day one, so that shouldn't be a problem.  Assuming
of course that upside down really is OK.

| Let me ask you this then: did replacing the original factory supplied
| drive with the Connor result in any perceived performance improvement?

I don't know.  I never saw the factory drive.  However, the Connor *seems*
to be a fairly nice drive.  I had heard good things about them, and was a bit
upset that it died.  It isn't very old.  And it has had no abuse (well none
until it died that is).

-- 
Jim Wright
jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu	(ignore the Reply-To: line)