On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 01:05, Fred Cisin via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
By refusing to create a "secondary" standard, he avoided dilution of
the standard
Well, I mean yes, in a theoretical ideal world.
https://xkcd.com/927/
But in fact, what he really did was make DOS FAT the standard. With
versions for DSDD 40T, DSDD 80T, DSHD 80T, DSED 80T, etc.
I know your dislike -- maybe disdain is a better word? -- for using
DOS FAT disk sizes as a measure of capacity, but it is what it is. _De
facto_ standards tend to trump theoretical or industry ones.
Dozens of OSes on as many non-x86 architectures can read and write DOS
FAT16 diskettes. Even by the 1980s, many common platforms couldn't
read CP/M disks.
DR's slowness to adapt to x86 gave DOS its break, and from then on,
DOS set the standards.
No?
--
Liam Proven ~ Profile:
https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven(a)cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lproven(a)gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
IoM: (+44) 7624 227612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884
Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053