This FAQ attempts to answer many common questions and clarify many IOMEGA ZIP DRIVE - Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)Ĭompilation, general info, and Mac info by However, be aware if the Windows asks you to format the disk on later versions of Windows DON’T DO IT especially if you are trying to recover data, instead find a computer with Windows XP or lower and use that computer to recover your data. Using the USB versions of the Zip Drives do work on Windows 7 onwards without the need for any extra driver installation. Drivers below are for the Zip 100, Zip 250, Zip 750 are below for Parallel, USB, SCSI,IDE & PC Card interfaces.
Writing to Iomega’s disk varies depending on which drive interface is used. New models are backwards compatible with smaller size disks. Storage is 100MB, 250MB & 750MB hence the 3 models that have each number. Also Zip drives were much cheaper to purchase, however the disks for the Zip drivers were expensive compared to CDRW discs. CD writers were available at the time but were slow and un-reliable at times. Of the third-party producers, FujiFilm used (and still uses) a proprietary manufacturing process for their magnetic media known as " ATOMM." Tech and marketing-speak aside, I've now extensively tested two of the FujiFilm disks, whose magnetic media was produced in Japan in 1996, and they perform flawlessly in all of the drives.Iomega Zip drives were the choice for expanded external storage in the 90’s and early 2000 because alternatives were 1.44MB floppy disks that were becoming a problem due to the nature of files and multimedia need much more space. In fact, Iomega themselves contracted-out the magnetic media production of their own branded disks to at least four different companies. This was mostly due to anecdotal accounts, as well as the fact that Steve Gibson, in his Q&A on the matter, states that the media is all the same. Now, up to this point, I'd been using only "Iomega" disks, intentionally avoiding third-party products. Several low-level format attempts later, these disks now appear to work fine in all drives. I bought and received a new three-pack of these, whose magnetic medium was produced by Taiwanese-based MegaMedia in 1996, and again encountered write errors with the oldest drive (but not nearly to the extent experienced with the Belgium-produced disks). Next, I decided to simply try more of what had worked - Taiwanese disks. While the two newer drives seem to tolerate these disks well enough, my oldest drive encountered write errors with every single one of them. With a subsequent purchase of ten new disks, whose magnetic medium was manufactured by Belgium-based Sentinel in 2001, I got my first experience with the "clicking" phenomenon. To its discredit, this disk happens to be powder blue in color, which just wouldn't do at all. This disk has been rigorously used, and has presented no problems in any of the mentioned drives. Up until just recently, I had a single, 100MB Zip disk, of Taiwanese manufacture, and of 1998 vintage. I have three Zip drives of different dates of manufacture: 1997, 1999, and 2000 (the latter being a Zip 250). A low tolerance for these defects by earlier Zip drives While Steve lists a number of vague reasons for its occurrence, I'd like to offer my own opinion for at least the intermittent, non-catastrophic variety of "clicking" behavior: Regarding the "click-of-death" phenomenon, one of the single best resources of information available on the Internet is the research by Steve Gibson, of SpinRite fame: Personally, I'm a bigger proponent of the the Winchester-based, more-capable Jaz format, but it's a bit more troublesome to interface with newer systems. While I have and use CompactFlash with all of my older systems, and generally rely on that as a means of data transport, I've recently begun adding SCSI-based Zip and Jaz drives into the fold as well. As mentioned, Zip drives can be a great means data transfer/storage, given their ubiquity, and ease of interfacing (parallel, SCSI, USB, Firewire) with systems both old and new.