Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!fred
From: fred@cbmvax.UUCP (Fred Bowen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm
Subject: Re: Which C64 disk drive?
Message-ID: <5802@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 26 Jan 89 13:06:36 GMT
References: <410002@hp-col.HP.COM> <410004@hp-col.HP.COM>
Reply-To: fred@cbmvax.UUCP (Fred Bowen)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 29

In article <410004@hp-col.HP.COM> warren@hp-col.HP.COM (Warren Tustin) writes:
>	The 1571 is no longer being made as a separate drive.  It also had
>	many early bugs>

Not true.  It may not be on many shelves or buyer's lists but the 1571 is
still available.  The "early" bugs were corrected over two years ago- this
should not affect any decision you make today, unless you buy a used drive.

>	The 1541-II is a 1541 with the supply separated.  It is more reliable
>	than the 1541 but still has a belt drive and hence the head rattling

Whatever spins the disk is not responsible for whatever rattles the head.  The
problem with older 1541's is that the head banging caused by some software
protection schemes, coupled with the lack of a track zero sensor in the drive
and other mechanical misfeatures, caused alignment problems.  It is not a
problem on newer drives.

>	[1571 clone] used a 1571 ROM copy for the OS and so infringed on the
>	Commodore patent.  Commodore took them to court to block sales.

Commodore alleges these drives infringe on copyrights, not patents.  While
lost sales are important, there is more to be protected than sales.
--
-- 
Fred Bowen			uucp:	{uunet|rutgers|pyramid}!cbmvax!fred
				arpa:	cbmvax!fred@uunet.uu.net
				tele:	215 431-9100

Commodore Electronics, Ltd.,  1200 Wilson Drive,  West Chester,  PA,  19380