8 Oct
2024
8 Oct
'24
11:58 p.m.
> I once had a brief discussion with Gary Kildall,
in which I pleaded with
> him to create a "secondary" standard for 5.25".
> He replied, "THE CP/M standard is Single Sided Single Density."
> He felt that people, disunirregardless of which hardware they were using
> SHOULD be able to transfer back and forth with 8" SSSD
> So, we ended up with thousands of 5.25" formats.
On Tue, 8 Oct 2024, ben via cctalk wrote:
That is because the 5.25 was 'no standard'
format, because the selling of a
cheap media device. 35 tracks, single density to who knows what, as
every other year a new standard and media.
I think the real reason Kildall stuck with that standard,was sectors were
128 bytes, and things had to shoehorn into what memory you had.
CPM I think was only 2K of ram for the OS,and 256 bytes of system RAM.
Also, he believed in a single standard, and the user had an obligation to
be able to get to and from the standard.
If he added "secondary" standards, as I was suggesting for 5.25", there
would be a never ending proliferation.
Need a standard for double sided.
Need a standard for double density.
Need a standard for 40 tracks.
Need a standard for 80 tracks.
Need a standard for 3"
Need a standard for 3.25".
Need a standard for 3.5"
. . .
By refusing to create a "secondary" standard, he avoided dilution of
the standard, and he stood up for his belief that everybody should at
least be able to comply with THE standard.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com