Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!franny.Berkeley.EDU!c8s-an
From: c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU (Alex Lau)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: New Jasmine Trade-in policy
Message-ID: <20293@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 5 Dec 89 00:18:43 GMT
References: <820@crash.cts.com>
Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: c8s-an@franny.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Alex Lau)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 22

In article <820@crash.cts.com> jca@pnet01.cts.com (John C. Archambeau) writes:
>cuello@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
>>Now, what do you guys think of this deal? Is this one of the strategies that 
>>Jasmine is pursuing to woo its unsatisfied costumers, or is this just a way
>>to recycle the returned-damaged-and-now-repaired HDs of previous months?

>That all depends on what mechanism they use in their 80.  If it's a Quantum,
>forget it.  If they use a Seagate or other unit, then the deal is worth
>investigating.

Now, wait a minute. Quantums are faster, quieter and have had a better
record (Apple's bad batch notwithstanding) than Seagate over the past
year. Than any other drive manufacturer other than Imprimis.

I have heard of *none* of the problems that Apple's batch has had
happening with other, non-Apple Quantums. Third Wave, a major reseller
of Quantum-based drives, has reported a less-than 1% return rate.

>                                                // John C. Archambeau

--- Alex "Boy, you have a big .signature!" Lau
(No disclaimer necessary)