Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread Dan Chisarick
Guilty of the exact same thing. My friend was over one day and say Why don't you try walking around instead of just rebooting? Then I remember frantically searching FOR the whirlpool not long afterwards. Ultima III is on the top 5 games I want to replay. On Jan 22, 2004, at 1:08 AM, Jim

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread AvatarTom
In a message dated 01/22/2004 12:21:16 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: God, yes!! Those were the days -- days when you were actually faster than your computer. I remember frantically ripping the disk out too. Yeah but you had to be careful. If it started to write the disk

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread Jim Leonard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah but you had to be careful. If it started to write the disk could be corrupted and you lose it all. I would usually make a copy of my save disk (with Wizardry it was autosave so VERY important) so I would be protected if my disk was ruined by a pull Yes, but I was

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread Edward Franks
On Jan 20, 2004, at 11:19 PM, Lee K. Seitz wrote: [Snip] I have yet to make serious use of my CD-R drive, sad to say. (However, I actually went through all my unlabeled 3.5 disks the other day and made some quick notes on most of them as to what they had on them. Now I just gotta doe the 5.25

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread Lee K. Seitz
Edward Franks stated: You might also check out want media brands your CD-R drive recommends, if any. Good idea. No name generics have spotty quality. I've seen some fail in less than a year. That said, even CD-Rs won't last as long as the factory press CD-ROMs games come on these

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread Jim Leonard
Lee K. Seitz wrote: It's just incredible handy to stuff gobs of 5.25 or 3.5 inch backups on a CD-R or DVD-R. Amen, brother! That's my goal. I've got a ton of disks to back up and get rid of so I can reclaim a little bit of space. It's even handier to back up 6+ CDs onto a single DVD-R.

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-22 Thread C.E. Forman
Seriously, I do seem to remember there was a difference between the CD version and the floppy version. Though given RTZ's lack of appeal I would agree that the floppy version is of interest to collectors and RTZ fanatics. Which is a bit of a shame. I liked the way they did the user

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread Pedro Quaresma
To me, games in 5.25 floppies are more valuable than their 3.5 counterparts. Why? The extra sleeves. Some games have really nice sleeves on their 5.25 games. The Softworld edition of the Origin (Ultima/Wing Commander) games spring to mind -- Pedro R. Quaresma Salvador Caetano IMVT Div. Sistemas

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread Edward Franks
On Jan 20, 2004, at 10:31 PM, Jim Leonard wrote: [Snip] Or am I the only one who executed a round of attacks in an RPG and sat with baited breath while the disk drive paused, whirred, taunting me with the result until finally the results were printed? I can remember playing Ultima III and

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread C.E. Forman
Yep, I found him right away. His eBay ID too. LMK if you want him on my jerk-list, he definitely qualifies. B-} - Original Message - From: Feldhamer, Stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 3:53 PM Subject: RE: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread C.E. Forman
- The CDROM version of Return to Zork was produced in greater numbers than the floppy-disk version, so theoretically the diskette version is worth more. Rarer, but not necessarily worth more, except maybe to a few collectors or RTZ fanatics. Who wants to actually play the floppy version,

RE: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread Stuart Feldhamer
I refuse to accept responsibility for this decision. : ) Stuart -Original Message- From: C.E. Forman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 6:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s Yep, I found him right away. His eBay ID too. LMK

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread C.E. Forman
Then you leave it in my capable hands. B-) - Original Message - From: Stuart Feldhamer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 6:22 PM Subject: RE: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s I refuse to accept responsibility for this decision. : ) Stuart

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread Edward Franks
On Jan 21, 2004, at 5:24 PM, C.E. Forman wrote: - The CDROM version of Return to Zork was produced in greater numbers than the floppy-disk version, so theoretically the diskette version is worth more. Rarer, but not necessarily worth more, except maybe to a few collectors or RTZ fanatics. Who

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-21 Thread Jim Leonard
Edward Franks wrote: I can remember playing Ultima III and trying to beat the disk drive if my party died. It was a bad habit to get into though.I used to restart the game when a whirlpool nailed my ship God, yes!! Those were the days -- days when you were actually faster than

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread hughfalk
As, poeple have already mentioned, 3.5 may be more useful, but it's obvious that 5.25 is more valuable. Look at the games that sell for the most on eBay (we're talking $500 - $2000 range). They're all 5.25 or cassette. Ask the guy if he has a cassette drive :-). Hugh -Original

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Jim Leonard
Lee K. Seitz wrote: I would hope anyone interested in vintage games would be knowledgable enough about the item(s) they want to know what format(s) it was available on and ask if they knew it came on more than one. It was very rude for them to give you negative feedback without e-mailing you

RE: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Per-Olof Karlsson
I recently built a new machine and attempted to get an old dual drive like this working but couldn't :-( Light was constantly on, like the cable was bad. I'll try again. That does sound like a bad cable, or even a good cable turned 180 degrees. - Peo

RE: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Feldhamer, Stuart
Message- From: Jim Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 4:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s Lee K. Seitz wrote: I would hope anyone interested in vintage games would be knowledgable enough about the item(s) they want to know

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Edward Franks
On Jan 20, 2004, at 2:48 PM, Lee K. Seitz wrote: [Snip] On this list or in the general population? 8) I think you'll find most of this list has some older hardware tucked away for just such occasions. I was mainly thinking of the average gamer. For people like us I take it as a given we have

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Jim Leonard
Edward Franks wrote: Who needs mo'slo when you can play Ultima 2 in all its CGA glory? ;-) You know, this brings up something that I've always maintained: No matter how convenient an emulator is, or how much it enhances or speeds up a game (ie making the game more 'snappy' because there are

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Jim Leonard
Howard Feldman wrote: So I can still use it as a 5.25 drive, or a 3.5 drive, just not both at the same time. I must open the computer and switch jumpers to get it to work! So in summary, watch out before buying Asus Motherboards!!! (Can anyone list decent contemporary M/B manufacturers whose

Re: [SWCollect] 5.25s vs. 3.5s

2004-01-20 Thread Jim Leonard
Dan Chisarick wrote: At the hight of my media conversion insanity, I had everything on a 4-port KVM. Now all the old machines are on their own network. I used a P-90 running Windows 98 w/a 5.25 Gateway drive that I sold and later asked for it back (they weren't using it). I also have a CPS