Compact Flash type I and type II

John Navas <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:54:07 -0900, floyd.DeleteThis@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)
>wrote in <87lk5gjey8.fld.DeleteThis@apaflo.com>:
>
>>John Navas <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:34:35 -0500, ELLIOTx.DeleteThis@webtv.net (elliot) wrote in
>>><29639-47BB9FCB-1116.DeleteThis@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net>:
>>>
>>>>Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>>>>$40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>>>>on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type
>>>
>>>No, just the opposite:
>>><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_flash#Type_I_and_Type_II>
>>
>> "The vast majority of all Type II devices are
>> Microdrives and other miniature hard drives. Flash
>> based Type II devices are rare but a few examples do
>> exist.[9][10] Even the largest capacity cards
>> commonly available are Type I cards..."
>>
>>The references are a 1999 review of a "a 224MB whopper",
>>and a 2004 review of a new $3000 each 8 GB CF-II card.
>>
>>To put it mildly, the Wikipedia cite is incorrect and
>>totally misleading because it is a decade out of date,
>>and simply does not provide a valid answer to the OP's
>>question.
>
>Nothing of the sort. What the Wikipedia article actually makes clear is
>that there is no benefit to a Type II flash card, just as the OP asked.

Read it again. And again if necessary.

You said "no, just the opposite", an cited the wikipedia
article to support that assertion.

It is wrong. Your statement is wrong.

Now you compound it with more invalid commentary. The
wiki article does not make it clear that there is not
benefit to the Type II card.

If it were correct, that is exactly what it would say.
It doesn't.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd.DeleteThis@apaflo.com
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

John Navas <spamfilter1.TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:31:44 -0900, floyd.TakeThisOut@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)
>wrote in <87zltwhvv3.fld.TakeThisOut@apaflo.com>:
>
>>John Navas <spamfilter1.TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>>Nothing of the sort. What the Wikipedia article actually makes clear is
>>>that there is no benefit to a Type II flash card, just as the OP asked.
>>
>>Read it again. And again if necessary.
>>
>>You said "no, just the opposite", an cited the wikipedia
>>article to support that assertion.
>>
>>It is wrong. Your statement is wrong.
>>
>>Now you compound it with more invalid commentary. The
>>wiki article does not make it clear that there is not
>>benefit to the Type II card.
>>
>>If it were correct, that is exactly what it would say.
>>It doesn't.
>
>Sorry, but you are wrong on all counts.

Another Navas "victory" by proclamation.

Facts don't seem to affect you, do they?

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd.TakeThisOut@apaflo.com
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

elliot wrote:
> Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
> $40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
> on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type
>
>
>
There is no specific advantage, although at the higher price, I would
expect the card to be faster (not that the type indicates that). Unless
your camera is able to use a faster card, there is little reason to
spend the extra money.
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:34:35 -0500, ELLIOTx DeleteThis @webtv.net (elliot) wrote in
<29639-47BB9FCB-1116 DeleteThis @storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net>:

>Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>$40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type

No, just the opposite:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_flash#Type_I_and_Type_II>

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

ELLIOTx RemoveThis @webtv.net (elliot) wrote:
>Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>$40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type

The only difference between type 1 and type 2 are the dimensions of the
card: type 2 cards are 1.7mm thicker than type 1 cards in order to
accomodate e.g. micro drives which wouldn't fit into the 3.3mm of type 1.

Either you got a ripp-off or there is some other difference between them.

jue
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:54:07 -0900, floyd.DeleteThis@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)
wrote in <87lk5gjey8.fld.DeleteThis@apaflo.com>:

>John Navas <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:34:35 -0500, ELLIOTx.DeleteThis@webtv.net (elliot) wrote in
>><29639-47BB9FCB-1116.DeleteThis@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net>:
>>
>>>Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>>>$40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>>>on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type
>>
>>No, just the opposite:
>><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_flash#Type_I_and_Type_II>
>
> "The vast majority of all Type II devices are
> Microdrives and other miniature hard drives. Flash
> based Type II devices are rare but a few examples do
> exist.[9][10] Even the largest capacity cards
> commonly available are Type I cards..."
>
>The references are a 1999 review of a "a 224MB whopper",
>and a 2004 review of a new $3000 each 8 GB CF-II card.
>
>To put it mildly, the Wikipedia cite is incorrect and
>totally misleading because it is a decade out of date,
>and simply does not provide a valid answer to the OP's
>question.

Nothing of the sort. What the Wikipedia article actually makes clear is
that there is no benefit to a Type II flash card, just as the OP asked.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:31:44 -0900, floyd DeleteThis @apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)
wrote in <87zltwhvv3.fld DeleteThis @apaflo.com>:

>John Navas <spamfilter1 DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:

>>Nothing of the sort. What the Wikipedia article actually makes clear is
>>that there is no benefit to a Type II flash card, just as the OP asked.
>
>Read it again. And again if necessary.
>
>You said "no, just the opposite", an cited the wikipedia
>article to support that assertion.
>
>It is wrong. Your statement is wrong.
>
>Now you compound it with more invalid commentary. The
>wiki article does not make it clear that there is not
>benefit to the Type II card.
>
>If it were correct, that is exactly what it would say.
>It doesn't.

Sorry, but you are wrong on all counts.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

On 2/20/08 12:54 AM, in article 87lk5gjey8.fld.DeleteThis@apaflo.com, "Floyd L.
Davidson" <floyd.DeleteThis@apaflo.com> wrote:

> John Navas <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:34:35 -0500, ELLIOTx.DeleteThis@webtv.net (elliot) wrote in
>> <29639-47BB9FCB-1116.DeleteThis@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net>:
>>
>>> Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>>> $40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>>> on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type
>>
>> No, just the opposite:
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_flash#Type_I_and_Type_II>
>
>
> To put it mildly, the Wikipedia cite is incorrect and
> totally misleading because it is a decade out of date,
> and simply does not provide a valid answer to the OP's
> question.
What else would anyone expect from NavASS? A plethora of spewing bullshit is
the norm. A fountain of misinformation he is. Eight thousand posts in a
year+ according to Google. The man hasn't the time to authenticate anything.
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

On 2/20/08 3:45 AM, in article 87ir0khsfr.fld DeleteThis @apaflo.com, "Floyd L.
Davidson" <floyd DeleteThis @apaflo.com> wrote:

> John Navas <spamfilter1 DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:31:44 -0900, floyd DeleteThis @apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson)
>> wrote in <87zltwhvv3.fld DeleteThis @apaflo.com>:
>>
>>> John Navas <spamfilter1 DeleteThis @navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Nothing of the sort. What the Wikipedia article actually makes clear is
>>>> that there is no benefit to a Type II flash card, just as the OP asked.
>>>
>>> Read it again. And again if necessary.
>>>
>>> You said "no, just the opposite", an cited the wikipedia
>>> article to support that assertion.
>>>
>>> It is wrong. Your statement is wrong.
>>>
>>> Now you compound it with more invalid commentary. The
>>> wiki article does not make it clear that there is not
>>> benefit to the Type II card.
>>>
>>> If it were correct, that is exactly what it would say.
>>> It doesn't.
>>
>> Sorry, but you are wrong on all counts.
>
> Another Navas "victory" by proclamation.
>
> Facts don't seem to affect you, do they?
Not at all.
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

Jürgen Exner <jurgenex.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
>floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
>>John Navas <spamfilter1.TakeThisOut@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:34:35 -0500, ELLIOTx.TakeThisOut@webtv.net (elliot) wrote in
>>><29639-47BB9FCB-1116.TakeThisOut@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net>:
>>>
>>>>Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>>>>$40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>>>>on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type
>>>
>>>No, just the opposite:
>>><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_flash#Type_I_and_Type_II>
>>The references are a 1999 review of a "a 224MB whopper",
>>and a 2004 review of a new $3000 each 8 GB CF-II card.
>>
>>To put it mildly, the Wikipedia cite is incorrect and
>>totally misleading because it is a decade out of date,
>>and simply does not provide a valid answer to the OP's
>>question.
>
>To the best of my knowledge the CF spec hasn't changed in the past decade
>and the only difference between type 1 and type 2 is still the 1.7mm in
>thickness of the casing, just like the Wikipedia article is stating.
>
>Is there anything I'm missing?

"The vast majority of all Type II devices are
Microdrives and other miniature hard drives."

Is that true?

"Flash based Type II devices are rare but a few
examples do exist.[9][10]

Is that true? Are the references cited valid information?

"Even the largest capacity cards commonly available
are Type I cards ..."

Is that true?

" ... some early CF based cameras where the slot is
too small and some of the poorer quality USB card
readers with the same problem."

Is that valid or significant?


That is precisely the section that Navas cited.

Is it necessary to go through that line by line? This
was quoted previously.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd.TakeThisOut@apaflo.com
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

Jürgen Exner <jurgenex RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
>Paul Furman <paul- RemoveThis @-edgehill.net> wrote:
>>Jürgen Exner wrote:
>>> To the best of my knowledge the CF spec hasn't changed in the past decade
>>> and the only difference between type 1 and type 2 is still the 1.7mm in
>>> thickness of the casing, just like the Wikipedia article is stating.
>>>
>>> Is there anything I'm missing?
>>
>>So type II doesn't mean microdrive any more?
>
>It never did.
>Microdive meant type 2 because you couldn't fit a microdrive into 3.3mm
>height.
>But of course as we all know from simple Boolean logic that does NOT imply
>type 2 => microdrive.

Yet the cited Wikipedia article says Type II cards are
rarely anything other than microdrives...

"The vast majority of all Type II devices are
Microdrives and other miniature hard drives. Flash
based Type II devices are rare but a few examples do
exist."

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd RemoveThis @apaflo.com
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

John Navas <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:19:53 GMT, Jürgen Exner <jurgenex.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>
>wrote in <phror3p28480cmanei3n2uul89oijvq4qm.DeleteThis@4ax.com>:
>
>>floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
>>>John Navas <spamfilter1.DeleteThis@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:34:35 -0500, ELLIOTx.DeleteThis@webtv.net (elliot) wrote in
>>>><29639-47BB9FCB-1116.DeleteThis@storefull-3334.bay.webtv.net>:
>>>>
>>>>>Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
>>>>>$40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
>>>>>on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type
>>>>
>>>>No, just the opposite:
>>>><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_flash#Type_I_and_Type_II>
>>>The references are a 1999 review of a "a 224MB whopper",
>>>and a 2004 review of a new $3000 each 8 GB CF-II card.
>>>
>>>To put it mildly, the Wikipedia cite is incorrect and
>>>totally misleading because it is a decade out of date,
>>>and simply does not provide a valid answer to the OP's
>>>question.
>>
>>To the best of my knowledge the CF spec hasn't changed in the past decade
>>and the only difference between type 1 and type 2 is still the 1.7mm in
>>thickness of the casing, just like the Wikipedia article is stating.
>>
>>Is there anything I'm missing?
>
>No. That's entirely correct.

But the Wikipedia article you cited is *not* correct.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd.DeleteThis@apaflo.com
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II 

elliot wrote:
> Staples is selling a 2GB CF type I for $18 and a 2GB CF type II for
> $40...Can anyone tell me if there is a good reason to spend more money
> on the type II as my Canon Supershot S20 accepts both Type

To answer your question directly......No.
There is no valid reason to buy the CFII for your Canon S20.
The S20 was introduced 8 years ago and cannot take advantage of the
higher speed that the CFII card MAY offer.
In fact, I would check with Canon to see if the S20 can even accept a
2GB card. In the year 2000, a 2 GB CFI card did not exist and I'm not
sure that a 2GB CFII (Microdrive)existed either. If it did, it would
probably have cost more than the camera itself.
Bob Williams
 >> Stay informed about: Compact Flash type I and type II