Path: cdrom.com!barrnet.net!parc!biosci!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!hudson.lm.com!tusk.lm.com!not-for-mail
From: quake@telerama.lm.com (Quake)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom,alt.cd-rom
Subject: Re: NEC CDR-510 vs. 500
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom,alt.cd-rom
Date: 28 Jul 1994 12:54:36 -0400
Organization: Telerama Public Access Internet, Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <318nsc$42e@tusk.lm.com>
References: <318k2u$kpa@marsupial.jpl.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tusk.lm.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: cdrom.com comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom:4056 alt.cd-rom:7437

stefam@rpi.edu wrote:


: Question.....

: Does anyone know of any performance difference between the NEC
: 3xi Triple Speed CD-Rom (CDR-500) and the OEM version (CDR-510) ??

: I do know that the 500 has the ability to play music CDs directly from the
: front panel and has an LED display.  The OEM version does not.

: But how about performance, speed, and reliability?  Has anyone checked it out?

: 						- Curious

: 						Mike Stefanini

: 						-no sig worth mentioning :)

There is a post here about how a young man that bought the OEM version 
was screw because NEC doesn't admit the warrantee of OEM products.  He 
got screwed pretty bad.  Check it out b4 you buy.  BTW the OEM he bought 
was heavily modified by the "resale" company.  In his case, Computer City.
-- 
Quake
GAT -d+ -p+ e(*) m+(---) s+/ !n(---) h+++(*) f++(*) g-(+) w- t--- r+ y++