9 Dec
2002
9 Dec
'02
4:26 p.m.
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 21:02, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
> > I've been looking at these [Catweasel]
controllers on and off for
> > awhile. What advantages do these have over a Central Point Option
> > Board?
Maybe I should have re-phrased my question as it might have come off
sounding sarcastic which wasn't my intention:
I'm interested in whether or not this controller can perform the same
functions as the Central Point OB, as the original part has obvious
limitations (as stated in the previous posts), none the least of which
are machine speed and bus interface.
What I'd be interested in:
Disk duplication: Is the controller capable of performing the same
quality of copies as the OB?
Disk images: Can the controller produce disk images for, and write
images for 1) PC 2) Mac 400K, both using a PC as the host and taking
into consideration the copy-protection requirement as stated above?
I understand defeating copy protection is not the function of this
controller, but that would be _my_ primary interest. I'm going to start
a fairly large archival project soon which would require setting up a
machine for the OB - something I'm not looking forward to. If I can do
this in a "smarter" fasion with the Catweasel controller I would rather
persue that route.
Jeff
On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Eric Smith wrote:
One obvious advantage is that you can use Tim
Mann's Catweasel Floppy
Read/Write tools with them.
That is significant.
Although the hardware capabilities seem likely to be quite similar, not
only is the Central Point board no longer available, but while it was
available, Central Point was very unenthusiastic about having any
third party software written for it.
It is not always clear in the literature for the Catweasel as to which
capabilities are theoretical possibilities, v which ones are currently
supported by available software. And when there is a statement such as
that it can read Commodore 64 disks, does that mean that it can read and
create raw images, or transfer files to and from?