On 18 Nov 2007 at 16:41, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
'course,
if they HAD gotten 500MB/side (v 400-500KB), then it would have
been well worth it.
Speaking of which, I recall seeing announcements every so often of floppy
drives that would have seriously more capacity than the usual stuff.
Something about "vertical format" sticks in my mind, though not much more
than that. Is this what that LS120 was all about? I think I ever only
encountered _one_ of those drives...
Maybe you mean perpendicular recording (PMR) that was used in the
2.88MB 3.5" floppies. Very unreliable. DSHD 3.5" diskettes are
rated somewhere around 17-18 kbpi density; an LS-120 exhibits about
45 kbpi--the real capacity gain is achieved by packing more tracks on
the disk. The LS-120 does this with an overlay that guides as IR
laser servo setup to get 1376 tracks per side. The disk is spun
faster to improve S/N.
The Zip drives use an "embedded" servo for positioning; that is, the
servo information is part of the normal track. In addition, Zip
disks have extra tracks called "Z tracks" which, among other things,
track and hide bad sectors so that every disk looks more-or-less 100%
"good". You cannot low-level format a Zip disk--if you degauss one,
it's trash, since the servo information is written at the factory and
nowhere else.
The Iomega drives were not the first floppies to use embedded servo--
Drivetek was--and obtained about 2.8MB and later 6.4MB on a 5.25"
diskette. If you happen to run across one of the 2.88MB ones, try
reading it in a 1.2MB drive--you'll find that you can see every other
track; thus, the Drivetek recorded 160 tracks per side. It used a
dual-positioner technology; a "coarse" positioner and a "fine"
positioner. But like all embedded-servo drives, the media was
factory-formatted. (BTW, Wikipedia is utterly silent on Drivetek).
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Chuck