Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!stanford.edu!agate!ziploc!eps
From: eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: CD-ROM Drives
Message-ID: <1779@toaster.SFSU.EDU>
Date: 22 Jun 91 04:22:48 GMT
References: <1769@toaster.SFSU.EDU> <_k=lqkq@rpi.edu>
Reply-To: eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott)
Organization: San Francisco State University
Lines: 99

In article <_k=lqkq@rpi.edu> gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
	(Garance A. Drosehn) writes:
>The mistake was the "future software will only be available on floppy"  
>decision.

Agreed.

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

Agreed.

>> + 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.

That's a good thing, but--in practice, every major CD-ROM
distribution I've seen has had problems "discovered right
after the freeze," and has needed at least a floppy-full
of patches to go along with it.  The advantage of the other
distribution methods is that a vendor can always ship _the
latest_ versions, and isn't stuck with a huge inventory of
goofs.  You don't expect them to remaster every week!

Anyway, with CD-ROM you still need another way to get the
diffs in.  At least on the Mac you can count on the floppy
drive there.  It's tougher on the NeXT.  Not every machine
has a floppy, or a modem, or an Internet connection.

>
>> + 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.

Agreed.  But it's become the norm.  I don't understand why
something I can get on paper costs ten to a hundred times
as much in a CD-ROM edition when the paper itself costs
more than the disc.

>> + 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,

No, it's because the publishers thumb their noses at standards.
They could just as easily use "pure" High Sierra/ISO 9660.
Instead, they CHOOSE to encode in proprietary formats.

>while NeXT doesn't officially recognize that the medium exists.

Oh, come on.  It's product #N3007.  My point is that even having
a CD-ROM drive, I still can't take advantage of most of the
existing catalog of CD-ROM releases.  Suppose the medium "takes
off" in the NeXT community.  Then we convince publishers to
produce NeXT-compatible versions?  Then they'll price the NeXT
version significantly higher than the PeeCee version because
it's for a "workstation" rather than a "personal computer."
Lovely.

>> + unattractive licensing terms have become the norm with CD-ROM
>>   products
>
>Again, that's a problem with the person writing the license,

I agree!

>                  Nobody is going to force NeXT to write up horrible licensing  
>terms if NeXT decides to distribute things on CD-ROM drives.

NeXT doesn't need forcing.  NeXT just has to follow suit.
I'd love to see NeXT be reasonable, but I just don't think their
corporate "vision" extends that far.  Besides, NeXT is really
too small to lead the revolution, all things considered.

>How much to Exabyte drives cost?

A lot.

>                                  How fast are they?

Could be better.

>                                                      How reliable are they?   

Awesome.  Exabytes are sort of the Telebits of the tape world;
pricey but soooo much better than anything else.

>Can you mount an Exabyte and navigate thru it using all the same tools as you  
>use for a hard disk?

No.  But you can install from it.  We were talking about software
distribution, right?

					-=EPS=-