I found the CF disk to be a much better alternative. 
Its solid state so if you drop it there is no risk the the drive, though I 
think the microdrives are shock proof. Its nice peace of mind though.

The cf disks draw less power which means longer battery life. 

Also cf is a bit cheaper per meg..
340md @ 135:  $.40 per meg
512cf @ 182:  $.35 per meg

The only disadvantage is that cf disks have a limited ammount of writes. 
I'm guessing I will replace the z50 or it will die long before I get close 
to that number of writes though, and if I do kill the disk I will just but 
another cf disk that is 6 times as big for about 1/10 the cost.


Hampshire_College.student("Mikel Waxler")


On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote:

> In message: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0203231734070.6568-100000@shox.org>
>             Robert Brown <shox@shox.org> writes:
> : Does the CF card use less power? Is the power savings significant?
> 
> Yes.  Yes, especially over the old, 300MB microdrivfe.
> 
> : Is the Microdrive faster than the CF card? The one listed above was 4x/8x.
> 
> Faster on write, I think, a bit slower on read.
> 
> : Are there any other advantages/disadvantages to CF vs Microdrive?
> 
> CF is quiet.  Microdrive can cope with swap partitions.
> 
> Warner
>