motrucker wrote:Tachyon wrote:I don't have a problem with the SuperCard+ and it is a similar solution to the Kryoflux. The main difference is that the Kryoflux has a much more proven track record and development time. If I were spending that kind of money, I'd be inclined to go with the proven device at this point. Now don't get me wrong. I think Jim does great work and I'm sure the SuperCard+
will prove itself eventually. But if I'm going to spend my hard earned money and I have these two products to choose from, at this point it's Kryoflux, hands down.
For example, SuperCard+ has nothing like this behind it.
http://www.kryoflux.com/?page=kf_refcustomers
Or examples like this:
http://www.kryoflux.com/?page=kf_refcustomers
Now as far as JD's uDIsk product, I'm all over that when he releases it.
[align=center]All that said, if I had plenty of cash burning holes in my pocket, me real choice would be to buy both. ;')[/align]
I think Jim's repution deserves even more respect than that. After reading up on it, and being involved in a Commodore forum on this very subject, I have decided to get one of these:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/SuperCard-for-C ... 20f99d65d1
to use with my C-128/1571 setup.
Oh, the thread I was referring is this:
http://www.REMOVED.com/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=100
Reputation has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Even people and companies with the best reputations in the industry make engineering errors and outright bad products from time to time. And with something as complex as a flux level disk archiver, there's plenty of room for such mistakes.
The only measure that matters is real world use, and in that regard, Kryoflux is unmatched. As I said, some day, Supercard+ may achieve a similar track record, but at this point, the advantage definitely goes to Kryoflux.
Though I'm not sure why you bothered to ask since you already seem to have your mind made up on this topic.