Fascinating notes!
I did run into oddities when using a 360KB disks in between a 1.2M 5.25
drive on the '386 and the 5.25 drive on the Sharp PC-5000. I forget my
exact sequence of events, but in short the MS-DOS 2.00
FORMAT.COM on the
Sharp PC-5000 would start marking a few bad sectors (sometimes just a few
KB, sometimes as much as 20KB of bad sectors). And yet those same disks
were formatted as just fine and no bad sectors over the '386. Or, if I
used IMD and wrote full MS-DOS 2.00 image to the disk, then the disk would
work (and boot) fine in the Sharp PC-5000. Without nit-picking the
specifics here (of whatever I did) - my lesson was there is definitely a
difference between a completely uninitialized disks, versus something that
has been previously formatted. Which, yeah, duh - but my real lesson was:
you can't always
FORMAT.COM your way back into a bootable disk. If
something else has "touched" the boot sectors, then another system might
start flagging those as bad sectors.
I'm not sure if IMD (ImageDisk) trumps all that? Meaning, whatever crap is
on the disk, does IMD not care? In otherwords, is using IMD kinda-sorta
like degaussing (and then applying whatever the image is)? It just seemed
to me that however I mangled the format on a disk, IMD was always able to
get me back into a usable (and bootable) disk.
I do remember (vaguely for me) in the 80s we'd get boxes of uninitialized
disks, and there were generally warnings along the lines of once it was
formatted to whatever system you intended to use the disk for, it was
thereafter basically committed to being used for that system. (but it
seems only because, back in those days we didn't typically have the benefit
of something like IMD software or a Greazeweasal - and I imagine the
documentation from disk vendors didn't want to get into the weeds of waving
magnets around your disk, especially when they already had bold warnings of
keeping your disk the heck away from any magnets :) )
Regarding the article on SF rail replacing disk drives, to avoid
"catastrophic failure".... recall a while back, ActionRetro made a RAID
out of floppy disk drives (3.5"'s). With all the firmware going into modern
SSD's and M.2's, I ponder the irony of "old dumb mechanical drives"
actually being (in a way) more secure.
-Steve
On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 8:35 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
wrote:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
The location of track 0 is radically different in
the 96 tpi and 100 tpi
conventions--there's about a 6 track offset. 100 tpi drives were also
spec-ed as being 77 track (like their 8" relatives).
Are the tracks offset from one side of a disk to the other?