8 Oct
2024
8 Oct
'24
8:45 p.m.
Hi folks,
I have a floppy disk data archiving project to undertake, and although I'm
aware that this can sometimes lead to spirited discussion (and hope to
avoid that!), I'm interested in current good practices for pulling data off
of hard-to-replace disks.
In this situation, the disks are 8" floppies likely in ordinary IBM
26-sector, 77-track, 128-bytes/sector, double-sided FM format. I have a
flux reader and will have a pair of Shugart 851 drives for the job; these
likely haven't been used for a while, though. At this stage I'll consider
the job done if I manage to get good low-level recordings from the disks:
assuming the FM data decodes well and sector CRCs look good, further
analysis can come later.
The main risk I'm worried about is physical damage to the media. While
reportedly the disks don't show visible defects (nb: they belong to someone
else so I can't inspect them myself right now), I'm still anxious about any
chance I might find the binder that secures the magnetic material to the
cookie degraded to the point of allowing the oxide to come free. Most other
situations I think I can deal with, but I'd like to have a more concrete
plan if I start to find oxide building up on the heads.
I'd be interested to know what precautions people might take for common
data recovery problems. One option is cyclomethicone for cleaning and
lubrication if necessary, but other than "you could use this", I'd be
interested to know details of how people put it to use if they are worried
about media failure. Meanwhile, I'm disinclined to use isopropanol or other
more aggressive solvents given received wisdom, although I know opinions
differ here.
The disks are boot media and other materials relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as developed
for PERQ workstations. I'm not aware of other copies of this OS being
available, though it would relieve some of the pressure to learn that these
weren't the only ones. The disks themselves are primarily ICL-branded
although a few indicate manufacture or resale by Maxell, DEC, Inmac, among
other brands.
Is there anything else that people would advise me to look out for?
I did find this thread
<https://classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2018-July/040673.html>, but
practices may have advanced in the past six years. I know the whiteboard
cleaner that folks seem to have liked is difficult to find these days,
particularly here in Britain. I've also had a hard time finding Photo Flo
or similar photographic wetting agents and have used deionised water with a
drop of dish soap instead.
Thanks for any advice,
--T
8 Oct
8 Oct
9:09 p.m.
Sounds like a fun project and thank you for taking that on.
The only guide I know of is this one <https://zenodo.org/records/13828372>,
which is a good starting point.
Other than the obvious cleaning tips. I think one suggestion often missed
is to use your ears. You can really hear when a disk read is going bad.
Travis
9 Oct
9 Oct
7:04 p.m.
Re: Obscure disk formats.
There is a couple projects with hardware that attempt and are pretty successful at doing
this, including decoding the many copy protection schemes.
Applesauce seems to be the most successful due to the creator being very involved and
responsive to solving new issues. There is an Applesauce discord that discusses it.
I have no involvement but sm interested.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 11:55, Travis Pierce via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Sounds like a fun project and thank you for taking that on.
The only guide I know of is this one <https://zenodo.org/records/13828372>,
which is a good starting point.
Other than the obvious cleaning tips. I think one suggestion often missed
is to use your ears. You can really hear when a disk read is going bad.
Travis
>
8 Oct
8 Oct
10:10 p.m.
Hello Tom.
We need a lot more of this type of preservation.
I've been doing my part and built an imagedisk machine with an Adaptec 1522CF
controller which allows me to read single density.
I've started specializing in systems with 8" drives.
Imagedisk along with 22DISK to read and copy CP/M files, and anadisk to dive into weird
formats.
All running DOS 5 via SD card on a machine that use to run Windows 95.
In my experience, old floppies read amazingly well after 45 years.
I've recovered almost all of mine and many others.
I run my SA850 open so I can see the head surface.
They are easy to clean and not near as delicate as we've always heard.
I worked on these in the 70s, then 5.25" drives at Percom in the early 80s.
Also in my experience, drives that have not been goofed with retain good alignment so
don't rush off to twist those stepper motors.
Reading SSSD 8" 28x128 77 track disks is fairly easy.
It's the crazy m2mfm formats from intel and DEC RX02 that are troublesome - I have
systems for those.
RogerArrick.com/computers
-- Roger Arrick -- Tyler, Texas, USA -- Roger(a)Arrick.com --
________________________________
From: Tom Stepleton via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 3:45 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Cc: Tom Stepleton <stepleton(a)gmail.com>
Subject: [cctalk] Valuable floppy archiving: seeking current best practice
Hi folks,
I have a floppy disk data archiving project to undertake, and although I'm
aware that this can sometimes lead to spirited discussion (and hope to
avoid that!), I'm interested in current good practices for pulling data off
of hard-to-replace disks.
In this situation, the disks are 8" floppies likely in ordinary IBM
26-sector, 77-track, 128-bytes/sector, double-sided FM format. I have a
flux reader and will have a pair of Shugart 851 drives for the job; these
likely haven't been used for a while, though. At this stage I'll consider
the job done if I manage to get good low-level recordings from the disks:
assuming the FM data decodes well and sector CRCs look good, further
analysis can come later.
The main risk I'm worried about is physical damage to the media. While
reportedly the disks don't show visible defects (nb: they belong to someone
else so I can't inspect them myself right now), I'm still anxious about any
chance I might find the binder that secures the magnetic material to the
cookie degraded to the point of allowing the oxide to come free. Most other
situations I think I can deal with, but I'd like to have a more concrete
plan if I start to find oxide building up on the heads.
I'd be interested to know what precautions people might take for common
data recovery problems. One option is cyclomethicone for cleaning and
lubrication if necessary, but other than "you could use this", I'd be
interested to know details of how people put it to use if they are worried
about media failure. Meanwhile, I'm disinclined to use isopropanol or other
more aggressive solvents given received wisdom, although I know opinions
differ here.
The disks are boot media and other materials relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as developed
for PERQ workstations. I'm not aware of other copies of this OS being
available, though it would relieve some of the pressure to learn that these
weren't the only ones. The disks themselves are primarily ICL-branded
although a few indicate manufacture or resale by Maxell, DEC, Inmac, among
other brands.
Is there anything else that people would advise me to look out for?
I did find this thread
<https://classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2018-July/040673.html>, but
practices may have advanced in the past six years. I know the whiteboard
cleaner that folks seem to have liked is difficult to find these days,
particularly here in Britain. I've also had a hard time finding Photo Flo
or similar photographic wetting agents and have used deionised water with a
drop of dish soap instead.
Thanks for any advice,
--T
10:24 p.m.
On Tue, 8 Oct 2024, roger arrick via cctalk wrote:
We need a lot more of this type of preservation.
I've been doing my part and built an imagedisk machine with an Adaptec 1522CF
controller which allows me to read single density.
I've started specializing in systems with 8" drives.
Imagedisk along with 22DISK to read and copy CP/M files, and anadisk to dive into weird
formats.
All running DOS 5 via SD card on a machine that use to run Windows 95.
. . .
I run my SA850 open so I can see the head surface.
They are easy to clean and not near as delicate as we've always heard.
. . .
Reading SSSD 8" 28x128 77 track disks is fairly
easy.
A trivial nit:
he said DOUBLE sided; which is unimprtant other than they are not "CP/M
Standard" format.
I ageee that Imagedisk is a good way to handle it.
IFF there were format weirdities, such as copy protection, then a flux
transition board is good.
I'm not sure how much good "baking" does.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
10:27 p.m.
I figured he was mistaken, the old 'standard' is SSSD.
-- Roger Arrick -- Tyler, Texas, USA -- Roger(a)Arrick.com --
________________________________
From: Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 5:24 PM
To: roger arrick via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Cc: Fred Cisin <cisin(a)xenosoft.com>
Subject: [cctalk] Re: Valuable floppy archiving: seeking current best practice
On Tue, 8 Oct 2024, roger arrick via cctalk wrote:
We need a lot more of this type of preservation.
I've been doing my part and built an imagedisk machine with an Adaptec 1522CF
controller which allows me to read single density.
I've started specializing in systems with 8" drives.
Imagedisk along with 22DISK to read and copy CP/M files, and anadisk to dive into weird
formats.
All running DOS 5 via SD card on a machine that use to run Windows 95.
. . .
I run my SA850 open so I can see the head surface.
They are easy to clean and not near as delicate as we've always heard.
. . .
Reading SSSD 8" 28x128 77 track disks is fairly
easy.
A trivial nit:
he said DOUBLE sided; which is unimprtant other than they are not "CP/M
Standard" format.
I ageee that Imagedisk is a good way to handle it.
IFF there were format weirdities, such as copy protection, then a flux
transition board is good.
I'm not sure how much good "baking" does.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
11 p.m.
On Tue, 8 Oct 2024, roger arrick via cctalk wrote:
I figured he was mistaken, the old 'standard'
is SSSD.
Well, that's the CP/M "standard".,
and, admittedly, on my first look at the message, I, too, did a double
take on "double density"
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.
The original poster was NOT CP/M, so 8" SSSD was not applicable. He said:
The disks are boot media and other materials relating
to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as
developed for PERQ workstations.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
11:41 p.m.
On 2024-10-08 5:00 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Tue, 8 Oct 2024, roger arrick 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.
I figured he was mistaken, the old
'standard' is SSSD.
Well, that's the CP/M "standard".,
and, admittedly, on my first look at the message, I, too, did a double
take on "double density"
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.
The original poster was NOT CP/M, so 8" SSSD was not applicable. He said:
Why are we archiving now, 25 years ago was the deadline?
The disks are boot media and other materials
relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as
developed for PERQ workstations.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
Ben.
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
9 Oct
9 Oct
12:16 a.m.
And yet, here we are.
When I built my first system in 1985 as a trainee technical officer,
the *first* thing I did was copy all of the 8" floppies I could from a
donor system onto my 5.25" DSHD drives (1.2MB - The biggest system in
the neighbourhood at the time), so I could return the borrowed 8"
drive to its owner.
I never had 8" drives at home.
I fully accept Kildall's rationale for having one standard - but we
have proven in the 50 years since then that a worldview that is static
doesn't work long term.
One thing worth considering is that CP/M never had subdirectories -
only User areas which are a pain to search for things within. (User1 -
DIR, User2 - DIR, user 3 - Dir... etc etc..) so limiting floppy size
to Single Density made great sense.
Fortunately, now we have modern standards that are extensible. They
cost us dearly in complexity, but it allows us to plug the next
available storage device into a USB orifice, and have it 'just work'
Just my $0.02 ;-)
Kindest regards,
Doug Jackson
em: doug(a)doughq.com
ph: 0414 986878
Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 10:59, Fred Cisin via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
> 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
3:37 a.m.
On 2024-10-08 6:16 p.m., Doug Jackson via cctalk wrote:
And yet, here we are.
When I built my first system in 1985 as a trainee technical officer,
the *first* thing I did was copy all of the 8" floppies I could from a
donor system onto my 5.25" DSHD drives (1.2MB - The biggest system in
the neighbourhood at the time), so I could return the borrowed 8"
drive to its owner.
I never had 8" drives at home.
I fully accept Kildall's rationale for having one standard - but we
have proven in the 50 years since then that a worldview that is static
doesn't work long term.
One thing worth considering is that CP/M never had subdirectories -
only User areas which are a pain to search for things within. (User1 -
DIR, User2 - DIR, user 3 - Dir... etc etc..) so limiting floppy size
to Single Density made great sense.
Dos also has no subdirectories. So did the hundreds of other 8 bit operating
systems. You did need to have two floppies, a: & b: have it work well,
but how much software did you have? A spread sheet, word processor
and Adventure.
https://www.ifarchive.org/indexes/if-archive/games/cpm/
A bit later down the road.
Online quote
"Microsoft hopes that Xenix will become the preferred choice for
software production and exchange", the company stated in 1981.[8]
Microsoft referred to its own MS-DOS as its "single-user, single-tasking
operating system",[34] and advised customers who wanted multiuser or
multitasking support to buy Xenix.[34][35] It planned over time to
improve MS-DOS so it would be almost indistinguishable from single-user
Xenix, or XEDOS, which would also run on the 68000, Z8000, and LSI-11;
they would be upwardly compatible with Xenix, which Byte in 1983
described as "the multi-user MS-DOS of the future".[36][37] Microsoft's
Chris Larson described MS-DOS 2.0's Xenix compatibility as "the second
most important feature".[38] His company advertised DOS and Xenix
together, describing MS-DOS 2.0 (its "single-user OS") as sharing
features and system calls with Xenix ("the multi-user, multi-tasking,
Unix-derived operating system"), and promising easy porting between ..."
Dos 2.0 was to be a single user version of unix.
Looking at DOS 2.0 manual, just floppies supported and yes the 8" floppy
was supported but not on the PC.
Fortunately, now we have modern standards that are
extensible. They
cost us dearly in complexity, but it allows us to plug the next
available storage device into a USB orifice, and have it 'just work'
What happens if does not work.
Come fix my system to have Mirror Cast work with my DVD player?
I had it play once, hung and never worked since.
How many times have you got a product, but it never worked with your
system or it got discontinued? 3D movies are a good example,
I got a 3D projector and then found they no longer made 3D movies
in that format.
Since I wear glasses the old red/green spectacles don't work.
Just my $0.02 ;-)
Kindest regards,
Doug Jackson
Ben.
PS. I try to connect, and the PC says disconnecting.
10:08 a.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 04:37, ben via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Dos also has no subdirectories.
(?)
So did the hundreds of other 8 bit operating
systems.
(??)
I used several which did. MGT G+DOS was my personal favourite. MSX-DOS
is CP/M-binary-compatible but uses MS-DOS FAT disks, with directories,
because the same chap wrote them both: Tim Paterson.
--
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
10:30 a.m.
On 2024-10-09 4:08 a.m., Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
The point here, was until hard disks with the PC became common you had
the tiny mini-floppies.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 04:37, ben via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Dos also has no subdirectories.
(?) So did the
hundreds of other 8 bit operating
systems.
(??) I used several which did. MGT G+DOS was my personal
favourite. MSX-DOS
is CP/M-binary-compatible but uses MS-DOS FAT disks, with directories,
because the same chap wrote them both: Tim Paterson.
That is new to me, but what cpu?
Where are the ADS for said product?
Ben.
3:32 p.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 11:31, ben via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
MGT made a range of disk interfaces for the ZX Spectrum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_Gordon_Technology
Little known in America but the Spectrum was one of the best-selling
microcomputers of all time, selling millions of units and in
production from 1982 to 1992, with dozens and dozens of compatible
clones from around the world.
http://zxspectrum48.i-demo.pl/clones.html
So, Z80, all of them.
The point here, was until hard disks with the PC became common you had
the tiny mini-floppies.
I do not understand your points at all.
I don't know what "tiny mini-floppies" are.
Before the era of the PC, the dominant format was 8". PCs used 5¼"
when introduced in 1981. Then after the PC AT in 1984, 1.2MB HD 5¼@
disks. Then after ~1987 and the IBM PS/2 range, they standardised on
3½ high-density 1.4MB disks.
So, no, the PC didn't make disks get bigger. They were bigger _before_
the PC and then they got physically _smaller_ but higher in capacity.
You also said DOS didn't support subdirectories. Yes it did, from PC
DOS 2.0 in 1983.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_DOS_operating_systems
In other words, very early on, before even the first 80286 machines. I
am 56 and I never saw a pre-DOS 2.x machine in my life.
I used several
which did. MGT G+DOS was my personal favourite. MSX-DOS
is CP/M-binary-compatible but uses MS-DOS FAT disks, with directories,
because the same chap wrote them both: Tim Paterson.
That is new to me, but what cpu? Where are the ADS for said product?
ADS? You want advertisements for a ZX Spectrum disk interface from
over 40 years ago?
Er, OK. Here are a couple.
https://spectrumforeveryone.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/MGT-Plus-D-Adv…
https://ia902300.us.archive.org/view_archive.php?archive=/4/items/World_of_…
The DOS that had subdirectories was UNIDOS. Here's the manual:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110721112654/http://www.sinclair.hu/speccyali…
For other platforms... well, as i said, MSX-DOS for the MSX range
supported FAT disks and subdirectories.
https://www.faq.msxnet.org/dos2.html
So did Microware OS9:
https://www.roug.org/retrocomputing/os/os9/os9guide.pdf
It wasn't that rare.
--
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
6:16 p.m.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 8:40 AM Liam Proven via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
wrote:
MGT made a range of disk interfaces for the ZX
Spectrum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_Gordon_Technology
Little known in America but the Spectrum was one of the best-selling
microcomputers of all time, selling millions of units and in
production from 1982 to 1992, with dozens and dozens of compatible
clones from around the world.
It sounds like the Apple //e of Europe :D
Sellam
10 Oct
10 Oct
9:22 a.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 19:25, Sellam Abraham via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
It sounds like the Apple //e of Europe :D
I think there were more _unofficial_ Spectrum clones than Apple ][
clones. We didn't know about them until after the fall of the Iron
Curtain and the rise of the Web though. _Official_ Spectrum variants
and compatibles are comparable: maybe under a dozen models in all?
The Sinclair ZX series were the Apple II series of Europe: the Apple
II was the first sub-$1000 home computer, but $1000 was too expensive
for Europeans back then, so the machines that had the impact over here
were the first sub-£100 computers, which was where Sinclair led the
field and was strongest.
For reference, in 1981, £1=$2. So Sinclair made the first sub-$200
home computers.
They were sold in America, but to Americans they seemed like toys and
they flopped. And Americans being American, they tend to assume that
means that they flopped everywhere and were just a footnote, whereas
in Britain and Europe, the Sinclair machines sold in the tens of
millions, so in the very early years, it was Commodore and Atari that
were expensive premium kit that only rich kids had.
Apple was the footnote: nobody owned those things -- they cost as much
as a car and were not very well-specified.
I was a hobbyist from 1981 or so and I don't think I ever saw or knew
a single person who had an Apple II. They were like rocking-horse
poop. You heard about them, this weird clunky super-expensive low-spec
computer that Americans were bafflingly into.
We had TRS-80 kit in the Tandy shops, but they were still expensive
and few bought them. Loads of people had TI-994As in the early days,
because they got really cheap.
Because of course most kids just played games, the C64 became big
after 3-4 rounds of price cuts, when it dropped to the point that it
was only 2x or 3x the price of a Sinclair.
PCs were basically unknown outside of prosperous businesses until
Amstrad launched the first affordable-to-Brits PC clone: the PC1512 in
1986.
'Til then, if an Apple II cost as much as a used Ford, then a Compaq
cost as much as a new Cadillac.
--
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
9 Oct
9 Oct
6:53 p.m.
Roger are you aware of Applesauce and Greaseweasel?
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 11:50, ben via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 2024-10-09 4:08 a.m., Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
The point here, was until hard disks with the PC became common you had the tiny
mini-floppies.
On Wed, 9
Oct 2024 at 04:37, ben via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Dos also has no subdirectories.
(?)
So did
the hundreds of other 8 bit operating
systems.
(??)
I used several which did. MGT G+DOS was my
personal favourite. MSX-DOS
is CP/M-binary-compatible but uses MS-DOS FAT disks, with directories,
because the same chap wrote them both: Tim Paterson.
That is new to me, but what cpu?
Where are the ADS for said product?
Ben.
8:30 p.m.
> I used several which did. MGT G+DOS was my
personal favourite. MSX-DOS
> is CP/M-binary-compatible but uses MS-DOS FAT disks, with directories,
> because the same chap wrote them both: Tim Paterson.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, ben via cctalk wrote:
That is new to me, but what cpu?
Where are the ADS for said product?
MSX is unknown in USA!
It was for Z80, and the disk format was MS-DOS
I saw some at comdex.
I waited for MSX machines to showup here, but it never happened,
although I did find [and buy] a Yamaha MSX machine from Waite Group, at
John Craig's Computer Swap America.
Didn't see another one.
Generic PC clones got so cheap here that nobody would buy Z80 any more.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
8:38 p.m.
Anent strange floppy formats--I recall there being one in the early 70s
that used a UART to encode an entire track (1 sector per track). I'm
not talking about using a USRT-but an honest-to-goodness 8-bit plus
parity start-stop, etc. device.
Was that one an OSI innovation?
-Chuck
9:38 p.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Anent strange floppy formats--I recall there being one
in the early 70s
that used a UART to encode an entire track (1 sector per track). I'm
not talking about using a USRT-but an honest-to-goodness 8-bit plus
parity start-stop, etc. device.
Was that one an OSI innovation?
Quite likely.
OSI (Ohio Scientific, Inc.) interfaced disks with a 6820 and 6850! :
https://osi.marks-lab.com/boards/schematics/OSI470.pdf
https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/the-strange-world-of-ohio-scientific-flop…
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
11:28 p.m.
On Oct 9, 2024, at 1:38 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Anent strange floppy formats--I recall there being one in the early 70s
that used a UART to encode an entire track (1 sector per track). I'm
not talking about using a USRT-but an honest-to-goodness 8-bit plus
parity start-stop, etc. device.
Was that one an OSI innovation?
Unsure of the 1 SPT detail or whether it was their innovation specifically, but that
otherwise matches my (limited) understanding of the OSI FDC.
ok
bear.
8:44 p.m.
On 2024-10-09 2:30 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
MSX is unknown in USA!
It was for Z80, and the disk format was MS-DOS
I saw some at comdex.
I waited for MSX machines to showup here, but it never happened,
although I did find [and buy] a Yamaha MSX machine from Waite Group, at
John Craig's Computer Swap America.
Didn't see another one.
Generic PC clones got so cheap here that nobody would buy Z80 any more.
I thought it was the cheap apple clones that did it, as most CP/M was on
the S-100 bus.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
10:24 p.m.
On 2024-10-09 2:30 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> MSX is unknown in USA!
> It was for Z80, and the disk format was MS-DOS
> . . .
> Generic PC clones got so cheap here that nobody would buy Z80 any more.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, ben via cctalk wrote:
I thought it was the cheap apple clones that did it,
as most CP/M was on the
S-100 bus.
MSX was later; PC was thoroughly dominant by then, and Apple was solidly
estalishing Macintosh.
MSX-DOS was created by Tim Paterson as a port to Z80 of MS-DOS
1.25. The rest, and hardware, was primarily Japanese, but later marketed
everywhere except USA.
https://www.msx.org/wiki/The_History_of_MSX-DOS
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
10:41 p.m.
Hmmm, MSX....
I only knew of MSX here in Australia (circa 1985/6 ish) because the
shop where I hung out, ogling Toshiba T300 PC compatibles has an MSX
machine they were trying to sell. I recall its colorful keyboard
Kindest regards,
Doug Jackson
em: doug(a)doughq.com
ph: 0414 986878
Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net
On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 at 09:24, Fred Cisin via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 2024-10-09 2:30 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
> MSX is unknown in USA!
> It was for Z80, and the disk format was MS-DOS
> . . .
> Generic PC clones got so cheap here that nobody would buy Z80 any more.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, ben via cctalk wrote:
I thought it was the cheap apple clones that did
it, as most CP/M was on the
S-100 bus.
MSX was later; PC was thoroughly dominant by then, and Apple was solidly
estalishing Macintosh.
MSX-DOS was created by Tim Paterson as a port to Z80 of MS-DOS
1.25. The rest, and hardware, was primarily Japanese, but later marketed
everywhere except USA.
https://www.msx.org/wiki/The_History_of_MSX-DOS
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com 
10 Oct
10 Oct
12:06 a.m.
MSX-DOS was created by Tim Paterson as a port to Z80
of MS-DOS 1.25. The rest,
and hardware, was primarily Japanese, but later marketed everywhere except USA.
I remember a handful of MSX-type systems in the USA, though, and some were
widely advertised, like the pre-/almost-MSX Spectravideo systems like the
SV-318 and SV-328, and the Yamaha CX5M, though Yamaha was pitching this almost
entirely as a music computer given the MSX capability would have been almost
irrelevant to an American buyer.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser(a)floodgap.com
-- ACTUAL CLASSIFIED AD: Parachute, used once, never opened, small stain. $100
9 Oct
9 Oct
10:02 a.m.
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
2:17 a.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Floppy disk, wuzzat?
:)
Chuck
(still kicking, barely)
Keep kicking!
It's a round piece of magtape material that wasn't long enough to make
a tape.
Some people even claim that if they ever get the bugs out, it might even
replace punchcards!
Just think, you could fold it up and carry it in your pocket.
There's a hole through the middle for spindling them.
And you could get a lot of them into your station wagon hurtling down the
highway.
'course, it'd take a lot of them to hold as much as a RAMAC.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
2:49 p.m.
On 10/8/24 19:17, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
It's a round piece of magtape material that
wasn't long enough to make a
tape.
Heh--that's a pretty accurate description. Invented in the 1950s for
audio recording.
https://ftldesign.com/Timex/
https://colab.ws/articles/10.1109%2FJRPROC.1961.287786
I'd say that it's all about the holes.
--Chuck
3:24 p.m.
On 10/9/24 07:49, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
From the above article:
"The unit is as simple to operate as a standard record player; nothing
to thread, no tape to break or tangle, no needles to wear out, no
complicated controls, no accidental erasures."
So Fred, as usual, is very perceptive.
9:55 a.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 02:25, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
(still kicking, barely)
Oh no! Glad to hear that you are, but something prompted that... Dare I ask?
--
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
2:42 p.m.
On 10/9/24 02:55, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 02:25, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
The whole thing could be summarized under "How I spent my summer
vacation" or "The big C and me".
--Chuck
(still kicking, barely)
Oh no! Glad to hear that you are, but something prompted that... Dare I ask?
3:19 p.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 15:50, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
The whole thing could be summarized under "How I spent my summer
vacation" or "The big C and me".
Ohshit. Sorry to hear that. I hope that they nuke you till you glow
and it's successful.
--
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
3:01 p.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Floppy disk, wuzzat?
I think it's one of these: https://i.imgur.com/XyzsyeD.jpg
:D
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
7:38 p.m.
Tom, make sure to clean the heads of the floppy drive and check the heads to see if they
don’t have any sharp edges, from excessive wear, that could damage the disk. Also spin it
up with a scratch disk to see if it spins okay.
Check the source disk for mold and dirt and see if it spins smoothly in the jacket w/o
hangup.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 12:05, Tom Stepleton via cctalk
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a floppy disk data archiving project to undertake, and although I'm
aware that this can sometimes lead to spirited discussion (and hope to
avoid that!), I'm interested in current good practices for pulling data off
of hard-to-replace disks.
In this situation, the disks are 8" floppies likely in ordinary IBM
26-sector, 77-track, 128-bytes/sector, double-sided FM format. I have a
flux reader and will have a pair of Shugart 851 drives for the job; these
likely haven't been used for a while, though. At this stage I'll consider
the job done if I manage to get good low-level recordings from the disks:
assuming the FM data decodes well and sector CRCs look good, further
analysis can come later.
The main risk I'm worried about is physical damage to the media. While
reportedly the disks don't show visible defects (nb: they belong to someone
else so I can't inspect them myself right now), I'm still anxious about any
chance I might find the binder that secures the magnetic material to the
cookie degraded to the point of allowing the oxide to come free. Most other
situations I think I can deal with, but I'd like to have a more concrete
plan if I start to find oxide building up on the heads.
I'd be interested to know what precautions people might take for common
data recovery problems. One option is cyclomethicone for cleaning and
lubrication if necessary, but other than "you could use this", I'd be
interested to know details of how people put it to use if they are worried
about media failure. Meanwhile, I'm disinclined to use isopropanol or other
more aggressive solvents given received wisdom, although I know opinions
differ here.
The disks are boot media and other materials relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as developed
for PERQ workstations. I'm not aware of other copies of this OS being
available, though it would relieve some of the pressure to learn that these
weren't the only ones. The disks themselves are primarily ICL-branded
although a few indicate manufacture or resale by Maxell, DEC, Inmac, among
other brands.
Is there anything else that people would advise me to look out for?
I did find this thread
<https://classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2018-July/040673.html>, but
practices may have advanced in the past six years. I know the whiteboard
cleaner that folks seem to have liked is difficult to find these days,
particularly here in Britain. I've also had a hard time finding Photo Flo
or similar photographic wetting agents and have used deionised water with a
drop of dish soap instead.
Thanks for any advice,
--T
7:52 p.m.
Tom,
If you would like some known good disks to test with, I'd be glad to format
a few 8 inch disks for you to use as test disks. Just email me and we can
figure it out. Chuck sent me a few disks when I was first setting up my 8
inch drives a few years back and that was invaluable. I'd be glad to pass
along the favor.
Travis
On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 1:38 PM Wayne S via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
wrote:
Tom, make sure to clean the heads of the floppy drive
and check the heads
to see if they don’t have any sharp edges, from excessive wear, that could
damage the disk. Also spin it up with a scratch disk to see if it spins
okay.
Check the source disk for mold and dirt and see if it spins smoothly in
the jacket w/o hangup.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 12:05, Tom Stepleton via
cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a floppy disk data archiving project to undertake, and although
I'm
aware that this can sometimes lead to spirited
discussion (and hope to
avoid that!), I'm interested in current good practices for pulling data
off
of hard-to-replace disks.
In this situation, the disks are 8" floppies likely in ordinary IBM
26-sector, 77-track, 128-bytes/sector, double-sided FM format. I have a
flux reader and will have a pair of Shugart 851 drives for the job; these
likely haven't been used for a while, though. At this stage I'll consider
the job done if I manage to get good low-level recordings from the disks:
assuming the FM data decodes well and sector CRCs look good, further
analysis can come later.
The main risk I'm worried about is physical damage to the media. While
reportedly the disks don't show visible defects (nb: they belong to
someone
else so I can't inspect them myself right
now), I'm still anxious about
any
chance I might find the binder that secures the
magnetic material to the
cookie degraded to the point of allowing the oxide to come free. Most
other
situations I think I can deal with, but I'd
like to have a more concrete
plan if I start to find oxide building up on the heads.
I'd be interested to know what precautions people might take for common
data recovery problems. One option is cyclomethicone for cleaning and
lubrication if necessary, but other than "you could use this", I'd be
interested to know details of how people put it to use if they are
worried
about media failure. Meanwhile, I'm
disinclined to use isopropanol or
other
more aggressive solvents given received wisdom,
although I know opinions
differ here.
The disks are boot media and other materials relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as
developed
for PERQ workstations. I'm not aware of other
copies of this OS being
available, though it would relieve some of the pressure to learn that
these
weren't the only ones. The disks themselves
are primarily ICL-branded
although a few indicate manufacture or resale by Maxell, DEC, Inmac,
among
other brands.
Is there anything else that people would advise me to look out for?
I did find this thread
<https://classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2018-July/040673.html>, but
practices may have advanced in the past six years. I know the whiteboard
cleaner that folks seem to have liked is difficult to find these days,
particularly here in Britain. I've also had a hard time finding Photo Flo
or similar photographic wetting agents and have used deionised water
with a
drop of dish soap instead.
Thanks for any advice,
--T
10:07 p.m.
Thanks Wayne! It's handy to get topical advice, as interesting as musings
about Gary Kildall and CP/M floppy standards may be :-)
Cheers,
--T
On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 8:38 PM Wayne S <wayne.sudol(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Tom, make sure to clean the heads of the floppy drive
and check the heads
to see if they don’t have any sharp edges, from excessive wear, that could
damage the disk. Also spin it up with a scratch disk to see if it spins
okay.
Check the source disk for mold and dirt and see if it spins smoothly in
the jacket w/o hangup.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 12:05, Tom Stepleton via
cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a floppy disk data archiving project to undertake, and although
I'm
aware that this can sometimes lead to spirited
discussion (and hope to
avoid that!), I'm interested in current good practices for pulling data
off
of hard-to-replace disks.
In this situation, the disks are 8" floppies likely in ordinary IBM
26-sector, 77-track, 128-bytes/sector, double-sided FM format. I have a
flux reader and will have a pair of Shugart 851 drives for the job; these
likely haven't been used for a while, though. At this stage I'll consider
the job done if I manage to get good low-level recordings from the disks:
assuming the FM data decodes well and sector CRCs look good, further
analysis can come later.
The main risk I'm worried about is physical damage to the media. While
reportedly the disks don't show visible defects (nb: they belong to
someone
else so I can't inspect them myself right
now), I'm still anxious about
any
chance I might find the binder that secures the
magnetic material to the
cookie degraded to the point of allowing the oxide to come free. Most
other
situations I think I can deal with, but I'd
like to have a more concrete
plan if I start to find oxide building up on the heads.
I'd be interested to know what precautions people might take for common
data recovery problems. One option is cyclomethicone for cleaning and
lubrication if necessary, but other than "you could use this", I'd be
interested to know details of how people put it to use if they are
worried
about media failure. Meanwhile, I'm
disinclined to use isopropanol or
other
more aggressive solvents given received wisdom,
although I know opinions
differ here.
The disks are boot media and other materials relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as
developed
for PERQ workstations. I'm not aware of other
copies of this OS being
available, though it would relieve some of the pressure to learn that
these
weren't the only ones. The disks themselves
are primarily ICL-branded
although a few indicate manufacture or resale by Maxell, DEC, Inmac,
among
other brands.
Is there anything else that people would advise me to look out for?
I did find this thread
<https://classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2018-July/040673.html>, but
practices may have advanced in the past six years. I know the whiteboard
cleaner that folks seem to have liked is difficult to find these days,
particularly here in Britain. I've also had a hard time finding Photo Flo
or similar photographic wetting agents and have used deionised water
with a
drop of dish soap instead.
Thanks for any advice,
--T
10:15 p.m.
My pleasure. Be aware that not all floppy disks were written the same way. Regardless of
different filesystems, there were different flux encoding schemes too.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 15:07, Tom Stepleton <stepleton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Wayne! It's handy to get topical advice, as interesting as musings about Gary
Kildall and CP/M floppy standards may be :-)
Cheers,
--T
On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 8:38 PM Wayne S
<wayne.sudol@hotmail.com<mailto:wayne.sudol@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Tom, make sure to clean the heads of the floppy drive and check the heads to see if they
don’t have any sharp edges, from excessive wear, that could damage the disk. Also spin it
up with a scratch disk to see if it spins okay.
Check the source disk for mold and dirt and see if it spins smoothly in the jacket w/o
hangup.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 9, 2024, at 12:05, Tom Stepleton via cctalk
<cctalk@classiccmp.org<mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>> wrote:
Hi folks,
I have a floppy disk data archiving project to undertake, and although I'm
aware that this can sometimes lead to spirited discussion (and hope to
avoid that!), I'm interested in current good practices for pulling data off
of hard-to-replace disks.
In this situation, the disks are 8" floppies likely in ordinary IBM
26-sector, 77-track, 128-bytes/sector, double-sided FM format. I have a
flux reader and will have a pair of Shugart 851 drives for the job; these
likely haven't been used for a while, though. At this stage I'll consider
the job done if I manage to get good low-level recordings from the disks:
assuming the FM data decodes well and sector CRCs look good, further
analysis can come later.
The main risk I'm worried about is physical damage to the media. While
reportedly the disks don't show visible defects (nb: they belong to someone
else so I can't inspect them myself right now), I'm still anxious about any
chance I might find the binder that secures the magnetic material to the
cookie degraded to the point of allowing the oxide to come free. Most other
situations I think I can deal with, but I'd like to have a more concrete
plan if I start to find oxide building up on the heads.
I'd be interested to know what precautions people might take for common
data recovery problems. One option is cyclomethicone for cleaning and
lubrication if necessary, but other than "you could use this", I'd be
interested to know details of how people put it to use if they are worried
about media failure. Meanwhile, I'm disinclined to use isopropanol or other
more aggressive solvents given received wisdom, although I know opinions
differ here.
The disks are boot media and other materials relating to the RSRE Flex
operating system <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flex_machine> as developed
for PERQ workstations. I'm not aware of other copies of this OS being
available, though it would relieve some of the pressure to learn that these
weren't the only ones. The disks themselves are primarily ICL-branded
although a few indicate manufacture or resale by Maxell, DEC, Inmac, among
other brands.
Is there anything else that people would advise me to look out for?
I did find this thread
<https://classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2018-July/040673.html>, but
practices may have advanced in the past six years. I know the whiteboard
cleaner that folks seem to have liked is difficult to find these days,
particularly here in Britain. I've also had a hard time finding Photo Flo
or similar photographic wetting agents and have used deionised water with a
drop of dish soap instead.
Thanks for any advice,
--T
10:42 p.m.
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:
My pleasure. Be aware that not all floppy disks were
written the same way. Regardless of different filesystems, there were different flux
encoding schemes too.
MOST are FM, MFM, or GCR.
But not all.
f'rinstance, Amiga is MFM, but does not use WD/IBM sector headers, so a
179x controller could read an Amiga track, but parsing sectors and file
system has to be done in software.
. . .and other variations, ranging from hard/soft sectors to CLV/CAV
(constant linear velocity (varying motor speed), constant Angular
velocity (fixed motor speed))
old floppies provide a neverending source of interesting stuff.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
42
days inactive
44
days old
38 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
ben -
Cameron Kaiser -
Chuck Guzis -
Doug Jackson -
Fred Cisin -
geneb -
Liam Proven -
r.stricklin -
roger arrick -
Sellam Abraham -
Tom Stepleton -
Travis Pierce -
Wayne S