Mac Expert 1995 Winter/Mac Expert - Winter 95.iso/Les fichiers/Tidbits/TidBITS#287⁄24-Jul-95

Text File | 1995-08-22 | 29.3 KB | 590 lines | [TEXT/ttxt]

TidBITS#287/24-Jul-95
=====================

Debating whether to buy that quad-speed CD-ROM drive? Managing
   Editor Geoff Duncan weighs in with the good, the bad, and the
   unexpected with these industry darlings. Also this issue, we
   bring you news on Power Mac production, new software shipping
   with new Performas, Microsoft's assertion that Microsoft Network
   is just an Internet community, and a solid review of Mac-based
   Internet mailing list solutions.

This issue of TidBITS sponsored in part by:
* APS Technologies -- 800/443-4199 -- <[e-mail]>
   Makers of hard drives, tape drives, and neat SCSI accessories.
   For APS price lists, email: <[e-mail]>
* Northwest Nexus -- 206/455-3505 -- http://www.halcyon.com/
   Providing access to the global Internet. <[e-mail]>
* Hayden Books, an imprint of Macmillan Computer Publishing
   Free shipping on orders via the Web -- http://www.mcp.com/
   Mac Tip of the Day & free books! -- http://www.mcp.com/hayden/

Copyright 1990-1995 Adam & Tonya Engst. Details at end of issue.
   Information: <[e-mail]> Comments: <[e-mail]>
   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Topics:
    MailBITS/24-Jul-95
    Making a List: Mac List Servers Arrive
    The Quad-Speed Quandary
    Reviews/24-Jul-95

ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/pub/tidbits/issues/1995/TidBITS#287_24-Jul-95.etx


MailBITS/24-Jul-95
------------------

**Power Mac Demand Exceeds Production** -- In what might be
  described as the same old song on a new processor, Apple confirmed
  last week that it is struggling to keep up with demand for Power
  Macs and plans to step up production. Historically, Apple has
  rarely been able to meet customer demand for its machines, much to
  the frustration of users and dealers alike. But the sheer size of
  the demand might come as a surprise. More than half of Apple's
  units are Power Macs; production of Power Macs have more than
  doubled since a year ago; and over _two_million_ Power Macintosh
  units have shipped since introduction. Additionally, Apple noted
  the Macintosh installed base now exceeds 20 million machines,
  double what it was three years ago. Nonetheless, the total
  personal computer market continues to grow at similar rates,
  leaving Apple consistently hovering at around ten percent of
  market share. [GD]


**Stormin' Norman** -- Apple recently tapped Apple Fellow Don
  Norman to serve as vice president of Apple's Advanced Technology
  Group, which is responsible for researching and managing future
  Apple technologies and product designs. Dr. Norman was previously
  working as Apple's "User Experience Architect," and is a widely-
  recognized expert on human interface design. He'd previously led
  UCSD's Psychology and Cognitive Science departments, and has
  published several books, including _The_Design_of_Everyday_Things_,
  _Turn_Signals_Are_the_Facial_Expressions_of_Automobiles_ and
  _Things_That_Make_Us_Smart_, all of which we recommend highly if
  you want to get a sense of where Don's thoughts and interests lie,
  and thus what he might be talking about within Apple. [GD]


**No, We're Just Part of the Internet** -- Everyone's favorite
  tycoon Bill Gates announced last week that the upcoming Microsoft
  Network (MSN) - already in manufacturing with the rest of Windows
  95 - will have full Internet access ready for U.S. users on
  24-Aug-95, the date Windows 95 is to be available. "Think of the
  Microsoft Network as an Internet community," Gates said. "Our goal
  here is to make this be a very, very large community." Though this
  is a far cry from MSN's original "the Internet is irrelevant"
  attitude, analysts note that Microsoft is being forced into this
  stance by other commercial online services like AOL and CompuServe
  that have aggressively promoted their Internet strategies. It's
  worth noting, however, that non-U.S. MSN users can't expect
  Internet access until the second quarter of 1996. [GD]


**Makes You Want To Shout** -- Cypress Research Corporation
  announced last week that Apple plans to bundle a version of its
  MegaPhone screen-based telephony software with new Performa 5200CD
  and 6200CD. MegaPhone works with the Global Village TelePort Gold
  internal modems installed on these machines to provide an
  answering machine, a full-duplex speakerphone, a contact manager,
  Apple event support, and automatic arbitration between incoming
  voice and data calls. Users of MegaPhone for Performa will be able
  to upgrade to the full version of MegaPhone for $50, which has
  advanced features and integration with PowerTalk, popular contact
  managers, and applications like FileMaker Pro. [GD]


**Rex Sanders** <[e-mail]> writes in regard to
  Apple's acquisition of Glenn Anderson's popular MailShare and its
  subsequent renaming (see TidBITS-284_):
  I was at Mactivity, too, and talked to the "corporate naming
  weenie" at Apple who came up with "Apple Internet Mail Server."

  First, without naming names, I've known this guy for about five
  years - he isn't a weenie. Second, he apologized for the name.
  Just a few days before the product announcement, Apple lawyers
  told him that MailShare had trademark problems, and they didn't
  have time to make an extensive search for any creative names. What
  could they approve? Anything generic, that started with the word
  Apple. So, we got Apple Internet Mail Server. Blame the lawyers.
  At least it's descriptive.


Making a List: Mac List Servers Arrive
--------------------------------------
  by Jason Snell <[e-mail]>

  At the beginning of the year, if you wanted to subscribe to an
  Internet mailing list, you'd have to send a message to a mainframe
  or Unix-based workstation running a program like LISTSERV,
  Listproc, or Majordomo. But just a few months later, there are
  three full-fledged Mac-based mailing list processors available,
  each of which brings its own unique strengths and weaknesses to
  the table.


**ListSTAR** -- The most publicized list processor is StarNine's
  ListSTAR, a commercial "mailbot" and list server package. ListSTAR
  comes in four different versions: ListSTAR/SMTP, which acts as its
  own SMTP server (but not as a POP server); and three versions that
  require another mail server: ListSTAR/POP (requiring a POP/SMTP
  server like the Apple Internet Mail Server, formerly known as
  MailShare), ListSTAR/MS (for Microsoft Mail-based systems), and
  ListSTAR/QM (for QuickMail systems). ListSTAR/SMTP is smart about
  large mail jobs: if a mailing list includes several users from a
  single site, it'll make one connection to that site and send a
  message to all five users at once. In contrast, the Apple Internet
  Mail Server is a little less friendly, making one connection for
  every entry on a distribution list.

http://www.starnine.com/
ftp://ftp.starnine.com/pub/evals/liststar/

  Aside from the networking code, all four ListSTARs behave exactly
  the same: they process incoming mail by moving sequentially
  through a set of user-defined rules. Rule are triggered by the
  content of the incoming message and perform actions like sending a
  reply, forwarding the message to a mailing list, adding or
  removing the sender from a mailing list, and even executing an
  AppleScript.

  As a result, ListSTAR is a powerful tool that's extremely
  customizable, meaning that with enough coaxing, it could probably
  perform just about any email operation imaginable. But that
  customizability comes at a price: ListSTAR can be complicated, and
  if your rules are buggy, you can bounce, lose, or misroute
  important mail.


**Macjordomo** -- A more traditional (and much easier to use) list
  server is the freeware Macjordomo 1.0 (no relation to the Unix
  Majordomo), just released by Michele Fuortes of Cornell
  University. Macjordomo is a POP/SMTP-based list server, requiring
  the use of a POP/SMTP mail server, whether that server is a Mac-
  based Apple Internet Mail Server or just some Unix-based server.

http://leuca.med.cornell.edu/Macjordomo
ftp://leuca.med.cornell.edu//Allora/FTP/Macjordomo/Macjordomo1b2.hqx

  Macjordomo's strength is its interface. Setting up a list server
  and individual mailing lists is accomplished through a series of
  windows and dialog boxes. Users can personalize their server from
  within Macjordomo by editing a series of pre-configured generic
  welcome and error messages. Macjordomo requires one POP mailbox
  for its list server account and one additional box for each
  mailing list it's going to run (currently limited to nine lists,
  though that number is expected to increase in the next release).

  Macjordomo can automatically create and mail out mailing list
  digests, and provides users on the outside with the set of list
  server commands you'd expect from a Unix-based list server like
  Majordomo or Listproc. Its main drawbacks are that it doesn't work
  as an auto-reply "mailbot," and it doesn't support APOP, the
  password-authentication scheme that adds extra security to POP
  transactions.


**AutoShare and FireShare** -- Two other list servers are
  extensions of Apple Internet Mail Server (AIMS), the Mac-based
  POP/SMTP server formerly available as MailShare. Though author
  Glenn Anderson has sold MailShare to Apple and will continue
  developing it for them (see TidBITS-284_), AIMS 1.0 will remain
  freeware.

http://abs.apple.com/products/mailserver.html

  The freeware AutoShare, by Mikael Hansen of Denmark, is a simple
  application that must run on same server as MailShare. Because it
  waits for new messages to appear in a watch folder before acting,
  MailShare is less intrusive than POP/SMTP based list servers - it
  only acts when there's mail that needs to be processed, rather
  than repetitively logging in to see if there's new mail.

http://www2.kb.bib.dk/Staff/meh/AutoShare/AutoShare.html
ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/pub/tidbits/tisk/tcp/mail/auto-share-10.hqx
ftp://ftp.freedonia.com/servers/AutoShare-1.0fix.sit

  AutoShare offers the same list server functionality as Macjordomo,
  including automatic digests, plus some very strong "mailbot"
  features: You can create accounts on your AIMS server that will
  automatically respond to all mail with a canned text file, and
  even vary what text file is sent based on the text in the Subject
  line. [In fact, TidBITS currently uses AutoShare to handle all of
  our automatic replies, such as Adam's, um, personal FAQ, available
  at <[e-mail]>. -Geoff]

  The downside with AutoShare is that doesn't offer much of an
  interface. Configuring AutoShare involves creating folders and
  correctly-named text files in the correct places. It's not very
  intuitive. A QuickStart document (in the interests of full
  disclosure, I wrote it) seems to ease the installation process
  somewhat, but using AutoShare isn't for the timid. Still, once you
  have the hang of it, AutoShare can be a seamless addition to your
  existing AIMS or MailShare server.

  In addition to the final 1.0 version, Mikael Hansen released a
  "1.0 fix" edition of AutoShare that fixes bugs involving
  AutoShare's "vacation mail" automatic reply system.

  Also available as an extension to MailShare is Jerry Stratton's
  "liberalware" FireShare, a series of AppleScript applets that work
  similarly to AutoShare, reacting when AIMS has placed new messages
  in a drop folder. FireShare offers mailing list, auto-reply, and
  FTP-by-mail capabilities. Though it's even harder to get up and
  running than AutoShare, its AppleScript nature makes it a highly
  customizable option for scripting aficionados. "Liberalware" means
  that registration involves sending a $10 donation to one of a
  selection of political organizations - details are available on
  FireShare's web pages.

http://cerebus.acusd.edu/html/FireBlade/FireShare/FireShare.html


**Checking It Twice** -- Which Mac mail server is right for you
  depends a great deal on your needs: ListSTAR is a powerful option
  for users who need customizability and the support of a commercial
  vendor; Macjordomo is easy to configure and use; AutoShare offers
  strong mailbox features and dovetails well with AIMS; and
  FireShare comes in highly customizable AppleScript form. Since all
  of these are available freely on the Internet (StarNine has made a
  time-limited version of ListSTAR available on their FTP site), you
  can look at them all and choose the one that's right for you - an
  option we didn't have just a few months ago.

    StarNine Technologies, Inc. -- 800/525-2580 -- 510/649-4949
      <[e-mail]>



The Quad-Speed Quandary
-----------------------
  by Geoff Duncan <[e-mail]>

  If you've paid any attention to the CD-ROM market in the last few
  months, you've noticed one thing: quad-speed (4x) CD-ROM drives
  are all the rage. Third-party, quad-speed drives for the Mac have
  been available from manufacturers such as NEC and Sony for some
  time, and Apple will be including quad-speed drives in desktop
  Macs. Double-speed CD-ROM drives are going the way of the 800K
  floppy drive, and quad-speed drives look to be the next step up
  the ladder. To make matters more complicated, there are also
  triple-speed (3x) and sextuple-speed (6x) CD-ROM mechanisms on the
  market.

  Despite the enthusiasm for this technology, there's a lot of
  misapprehension. Do I _need_ a quad-speed CD-ROM? I heard quad-
  speed drives can be _slower_ than double-speed CD-ROMs?! What does
  it mean for a CD-ROM to be "engineered" for quad-speed drives?
  Although this article probably won't answer every question out
  there, hopefully it'll help clarify a few key issues. Most of the
  issues in this article apply to any high-speed CD-ROM drive,
  including 3x, 6x, and (yes) 15x drives, although I'll be using the
  term "quad-speed" generically.


**What Quad-Speed Means** -- "Quad-speed" means that a CD-ROM
  drive is _capable_ of sending data at four times the speed of a
  "standard" single-speed CD-ROM drive. A single-speed CD-ROM
  delivers data to the computer at a speed of about 150K per second
  - and that's a best case figure. A double-speed CD-ROM - like the
  AppleCD 300 series common in the last few years' worth of desktop
  Macs - delivers information at about 300K per second (again, best
  case). A quad-speed drive can achieve in the neighborhood of 600K
  per second. So the rate at which a quad-speed CD drive can deliver
  information can be as much as four times faster than the original
  single-speed CD-ROM drives.

  Please note the word "capable" in the first sentence of the
  paragraph above. All sorts of things can conspire to prevent
  quad-speed transfers from happening or helping you: some reasons
  are obvious and some are subtle. There are detailed examples
  below, but, succinctly, simply replacing a single-speed CD-ROM
  drive with a quad-speed CD-ROM drive is not guaranteed to give you
  a fourfold increase in actual performance.


**Seek and Ye Shall Find** -- The speed at which information is
  delivered to the computer isn't the only thing that's improved
  with time. Newer CD-ROM drives typically have much faster seek
  times, which is how long the drive typically spends looking for a
  particular spot on a CD-ROM disk. Single-speed drives have typical
  seek times of in the neighborhood of 300 to 500 milliseconds (ms),
  so it can take them as much as half a second to get to a
  particular location on a CD-ROM. Double-speed drives typically
  have seek times between 250 and 350 ms, and typical quad-speed
  drives have seek times around 150 to 200 ms. In contrast, today's
  hard drives usually have access times less than 10 ms, so even the
  best CD-ROM drive will take at least ten times longer to seek than
  your hard disk.

  How does seek time affect you? To put it simply, the more often
  the CD-ROM drive has to go to a specific location on a disk
  (rather than just reading from the disk sequentially), the more
  often seek time is a factor in the perceived speed of the drive.
  The effects of seek times can often be seen when opening Finder
  windows with large number of files, particularly if those files
  have custom icons (like typical Photoshop files). In that case,
  for each file the CD drive has to get information from the desktop
  database, then scoot out to the file's physical location on disk
  to load the icon, then scoot back to the desktop database for the
  next file. All that jumping around can take some time and make the
  drive seem very slow. Similarly, reading a 2 MB text file that's
  fragmented on the CD-ROM and stored in twenty different pieces is
  going to take longer than reading the same file stored
  contiguously on the disk (one seek versus twenty seeks). So, it's
  important to note that (a) seek time can dramatically affect the
  perceived performance of the drive and, (b) because the physical
  layout of a given CD-ROM can be a major factor; when a drive seeks
  is largely beyond your control.

  [If you're annoyed by waiting for all those custom icons to appear
  from a CD-ROM, check out Fabrizio Oddone's <[e-mail]>
  version of Quinn and Peter Lewis's CDIconKiller, which suppresses
  display of custom icons on CD-ROM's, floppies, and network
  volumes. The performance increase is astounding!]

ftp://mirrors.aol.com//pub/info-mac/disk/cd-icon-killer-133.hqx

  It's important to note that while most quad-speed drives have
  respectable seek times, the term "quad-speed" only applies to the
  _rate_ at which the drive can deliver data to your computer, not
  the seek time. It's perfectly possible - and perfectly valid
  advertising - to have a quad-speed drive with a horrendously slow
  seek time.


**Sports Cars and Dirt Roads** -- So, having a quad-speed drive
  means your CD-ROM multimedia titles and games will go faster and
  perform better, right? Not necessarily, and, actually, probably
  not. The common statement heard from CD-ROM vendors, software
  developers, and dealers is that the CD-ROMs must be engineered to
  take advantage of the quad-speed capabilities. What exactly does
  that mean?

  One common confusion is that these specially-engineered disks are
  somehow physically different than other CD-ROMs. This is untrue.
  The physical format of the CD-ROM doesn't care whether the drive
  is single-speed, double-speed, quad-speed, or whatever. The real
  question is whether the software used to access that disk is
  capable of taking advantage of a quad-speed drive's improved
  data-delivery capability.

  QuickTime video is the most commonly-used example when talking
  about these issues, so I'll use it here too. A quad-speed CD-ROM
  drive has the _potential_ to smoothly play back larger and more
  complex QuickTime movies because it can deliver data to the
  computer faster. Does this mean a quad-speed drive will improve
  _all_ QuickTime performance from CD-ROM? No. Here's why: a given
  QuickTime movie has a minimum data throughput requirement for
  smooth playback. This rate is determined by the capture and/or
  production of the QuickTime movie prior to being put on CD-ROM
  (using tools like Adobe Premiere). Once set, this minimum
  throughput requirement isn't changed by your computer or your
  CD-ROM drive.

  For example: say a certain QuickTime movie requires a throughput
  of 220K per second for smooth playback. All else being equal, a
  double-speed CD-ROM drive will be able to play the movie smoothly
  (double-speed drives are rated around 300K per second, remember),
  whereas a single-speed CD-ROM drive would cause QuickTime to drop
  frames and maybe stutter in order to put the video on screen. Now,
  a more macho QuickTime movie - say 320 by 240 pixels (quarter-
  screen), 24-bit, at 12 frames per second - might require 550K per
  second for smooth playback. In this case (all other things being
  equal, remember) a quad-speed drive would be likely to play the
  movie back smoothly, whereas that double-speed drive would cause
  QuickTime to drop frames or give interrupted playback.

  So what's the problem? The QuickTime video used in most multimedia
  titles - from games like Myst to reference works like Grolier's
  Encyclopedia or Cinemania - does not have throughput requirements
  in the range of quad-speed drives. In fact, most of these titles
  are only now beginning to include videos with throughput
  requirements greater than 120K per second. That's right: all this
  time and they're still including videos produced to play back on
  single-speed CD-ROMs! Why? Because a large enough subset of their
  customers have single-speed drives and would complain or demand
  refunds if the video was choppy. Since the CD-ROM industry has a
  very high return rate, these companies don't take many chances
  with ticking off their customer base. They don't like it either -
  they _want_ to put cool videos on there - but it's just not that
  simple. By the same token, you can bet it's going to take a while
  - at least two years - before mainstream CD-ROM applications will
  assume a user has a quad-speed or better CD-ROM drive. And by
  then, CD-ROM as a media might well be going the way of the 800K
  floppy.

  Game developers, on the other hand, often don't have qualms about
  requiring high-end hardware. In the DOS/Windows world, there are
  already games appearing which require quad-speed CD-ROMs for
  optimal play. You can expect the same thing in the Mac world if
  it's not happening already, especially with arcade-style and
  action games that make heavy use of QuickTime and graphics.

  Want to see what other flies are in the ointment? OK: some disks
  developed with single-speed or double-speed CD-ROM drives in mind
  can be _slower_ on quad-speed drives than on double-speed or even
  single-speed drives, especially on some mid-range and low-end
  machines. Why? Software, memory, and seek time. Say the computer
  asks for a 120K chunk of data at the beginning of a QuickTime
  movie. The CD-ROM drive seeks out to the file and starts pumping
  data in. While the computer is happily thinking about the data,
  the quad-speed drive runs off into the tumbleweeds, whereas the
  pokier double-speed and single-speed drives stay in the
  neighborhood. The result is that when the computer asks for the
  _next_ 120K of the same file, the single-speed and double-speed
  drives can sometimes deliver it, whereas the quad-speed drive
  might have to re-seek to get back to the right location on disk,
  and that will be slower. This is an over-generalization - the
  specifics vary on a case by case basis - but you get the idea.


**Cache or Charge?** Purists will note the example above is
  technically inaccurate. "Wrong," they say, "that material is in
  the cache - the drive might not have to seek at all." Well, yes:
  but that's not true in all situations because - let's face it -
  caches aren't all that smart.

  What are caches? Since CD-ROM drives are notoriously slow, most if
  not all drives have a bit of onboard memory they use to stash
  material for quicker access. The amount of memory varies, but is
  generally between 64K (older, single-speed drives) and 256K
  (typical quad-speed drives). On-board cache implementations vary,
  but generally they're sector-based: when the computer asks for
  information at a particular sector of the CD-ROM, the disk reads
  and caches material around that location, figuring it's pretty
  likely the computer's next request will be for some of that
  adjacent material. If the caching mechanism is right, the next set
  of requested data is rapidly transferred out of the cache without
  the drive having to seek for it (or, more likely, covering for the
  drive while it's seeking and reading yet more data). On the other
  hand, if the next request is for some file off in the CD's
  unexplored linen closet, the material in the cache is discarded
  and the drive has to seek and read as it would without the cache.
  Bottom line: these caches can help, sometimes.

  There are also third-party software products like Casa Blanca's
  DriveCD and FWB's CD-ROM ToolKit that implement smarter caching
  schemes using your hard disk and RAM. Since the Mac's RAM and hard
  disk are significantly faster than the CD-ROM, these products
  transfer material from the CD-ROM and stash it in RAM and/or on
  your hard disk. When your Mac asks the CD drive for some of that
  material, the caching system politely intercepts the call and says
  "Why, I have that information right here." These systems typically
  want about 1 MB of RAM and between 2 and 5 MB of hard disk space.
  They generally deliver measurable performance improvements,
  particularly with typical multimedia titles and games. Also, the
  intelligence built into these products can be helpful with some
  CD-ROMs. For instance, if a particular reference CD-ROM always
  asks for the same file over and over again, the caching system
  might make sure that file is _always_ on your hard disk so the
  program never had to get it from the CD-ROM. This can be far more
  helpful than the simple, blind sector caching that CD-ROM drives
  do on their own.

  On the other hand, these products do have a price. For one thing,
  on lower-end Macs (like LCs and LC II's), the overhead of managing
  and sustaining a caching system on your Macintosh often takes
  enough time away from your processor to significantly hinder the
  performance of a typical CD-ROM title. For another, losing 1 MB or
  more of RAM and a few megabytes of your hard disk isn't an option
  for some Macintosh users: sure, these caching products might help,
  but they can be resource-intensive.

  Also, there are certain CD-ROM applications where these caching
  products won't help much, for all their intelligence. The classic
  example is a set of CD-ROMs with compressed U.S. Census data I
  have to work with every once in a while. With those disks, I
  rarely seek: I just read about 100 megabytes of straight,
  contiguous data, then pop in the next disk. A caching product
  would actually slow me down as it tries to adjust to all the
  disk-swapping and analyze what I'm doing. In this case (which is
  admittedly pretty specialized), I don't want my Mac spending time
  analyzing my CD drive's behavior: I want it reading and
  decompressing that information as fast as possible.

  In summary: third-party CD-ROM caching products can often boost
  the performance of typical CD-ROM titles on mid-range and high-end
  Macs, if you're willing to sacrifice some RAM and hard disk space.


**Filling the Gap** -- Let's review the points above one by one:

* Quad-speed CD-ROM drives are not going to be a panacea for slow
  CD-ROM titles, and you shouldn't necessarily expect a CD-ROM title
  to perform better just because it's in a faster drive.

* There's no physical difference between CD-ROMs that take
  advantage of quad-speed drives and those that do not: it's all in
  the content of the CDs and the software which accesses it.

* Seek time is an important factor in the perceived performance of
  a CD-ROM. Shoddy preparation of a disk can humble even the fastest
  drives.

* Most consumer CD-ROMs will not explicitly take advantage of
  quad-speed drives for some time to come, although games will lead
  the way.

* CD-ROM caching products can significantly improve the perceived
  performance of typical CD-ROM applications, although they have a
  cost and don't help in all cases.

  Should you spring for a quad-speed CD-ROM drive now, or take
  advantage of the reduced prices on double-speed drives? As always,
  the answer is "it depends." For some groups of users, the
  performance difference between a double-speed and quad-speed
  CD-ROM drive will be negligible; for people working with high-
  quality video, games, and other bandwidth-intensive projects, the
  quad-speed drives are an absolute godsend.

  However, here's one thing to bear in mind when purchasing: the
  industry _is_ gravitating away from the double-speed CD-ROM
  standard, and that trend will accelerate with time. If you're
  looking to buy a drive to use for the next few years, it makes
  sense to go for a technology that will be less obsolete as time
  passes. If money is a big factor in your decision, a double-speed
  drive will be adequate for some time to come.

    Casa Blanca Works -- 415/461-2227 -- 415/461-2249 (fax)
      <[e-mail]>
    FWB -- 415/474-8055 -- 415/775-2125 (fax)
      <[e-mail]>


Reviews/24-Jul-95
-----------------

* MacWEEK -- 17-Jul-95, Vol. 9, #28
    Apple Color StyleWriter 2200 -- pg. 27
    DayStar 100 MHz PowerPro 601 -- pg. 27
    Ray Dream AddDepth 2.0 -- pg. 30
    AG Group NetWatchman 2.2 -- pg. 31
    APS HyperTape -- pg. 32

* InfoWorld -- 17-Jul-95, Vol. 17, #29
    Claris Emailer -- pg. 44


$$

 Non-profit, non-commercial publications may reprint articles if
 full credit is given. Others please contact us. We don't guarantee
 accuracy of articles. Caveat lector. Publication, product, and
 company names may be registered trademarks of their companies.

 This file is formatted as setext. For more information send email
 to <[e-mail]>. A file will be returned shortly.

 For information on TidBITS: how to subscribe, where to find back
 issues, and other useful stuff, send email to: <[e-mail]>
 Send comments and editorial submissions to: <[e-mail]>
 Issues available at: ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/pub/tidbits/issues/
 And: http://www.dartmouth.edu/pages/TidBITS/TidBITS.html
 To search back issues with WAIS, use this URL via a Web browser:
 http://www.wais.com/wais-dbs/macintosh-tidbits.html
 -------------------------------------------------------------------