A "rose" by any other name (Was: DD versus HD 5.25" floppy drives

On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Christian Corti wrote: PLEASE select SHORT and ACCURATE (mutually exclusive) terms for the types of 5.25" drives. SERIOUSLY. We are giving each other hell over sloppiness and inexactitude in the terminology, but WHAT terms could be used, instead, that are accurate, but short enough that people will actually USE them? "Drive type 7" (for FLOPPIES!) did NOT catch on. (That was an attempt in DRIVER.SYS) http://users.cybercity.dk/~bse26236/batutil/help/DRIVER_S.HTM Calling them "360K", "720K" (not to be confused with 3.5"), or "1.2M" drives is unambiguous, but VERY OFFENSIVELY sloppy. We all know, and as Allison itemized, a "360K" drive can be from about 60K to about 440K. ALSO, "360K" could be misinterpreted to refer to some SSDD 96tpi formats. In order to avoid THAT offense, I called them "HD" and "DD" drives, as the original poster had. THAT action ignored the SSSD (unusual), DSSD (unusual), DSDD and SSDD 96tpi drives, and invoked your ire. Sorry about that. "QUAD density" is very offensive. It is NOT an increase in "density", but, instead, an increase in capacity. "DD-96tpi" would be better, but how many here would OBJECT to assuming "DD" is 48tpi unless specified otherwise? (just as using both sides is NOT an increase in "density"): "SUPER DENSITY", abbreviated "SD"!!! (DSDD 96tpi) as used by Intertec (Superbrain) was called that because it was "higher density than our 'quad density'" (SSDD 96tpi). It is SO silly and stupid that it is hard not to laugh. I don't know. Is it funny enough to over-ride its extreme offensiveness? "HD" is also offensive. It is NOT a change in recording method, and hardly qualifies as "high" (although the marketing people might have been!) it is just normal "MFM" at twice the data transfer rate but similar (300/360) RPM. "SD" is offensive to some disk design engineers. "It is really 'HALF density', with two flux transition positions per bit!" "DD" is offensive to some disk design engineers. "It is NOT double. It is still less than one bit per flux transition. It is 'double' only in terms of the data transfer rate, which is NOT the same as the 'density'". BTW, if you do historical searches (NOT just current Google, or even "Wayback"), you will find that "double density" as a TERM existed before "single density" existed as a TERM! Likewise, "World War Two" is mentioned in earlier newspapers than "World War One" is! Neither "single density" nor "World War One" were called that (they had other names) until the other one came along and had been discussed for a while. :-) When somebody says that they want to write to Apple2 disks, you assume that they are talking about 96tpi? THAT is the dumbest excuse :-) YES, it is possible to put 96tpi (AND 100TPI) drives on an Apple2. When somebody asks about writing Apple2 diskettes, what do you THINK they are talking about? I've used 3" diskettes (NO, NOT 3.5") on Apple2 (pre-Amstrad Amdek). Perhaps we should assume that THAT is what he is asking about? One can never give a definitive answer, unless you also personally examine the system, and MEASURE all components. Paraphrasing the original question (drive models added for disambiguation): "I am setting up an external drive system for use with DisKFerret and CatWeasel for reading and writing diskettes that stock FDC has difficulties with, such as Apple2, TRS80Model1, Commodore64, etc. "I have a some "DD" drives (Teac FFB and SA455) and some "HD" drives (Teac55F and SA475). Which of the two types of drives do you suggest that I use? Will the "HD" drives give me trouble? ABSOLUTELY, IN ADDITION to the simple answer, NOT INSTEAD of it. The FIRST response was a misreading of the question (sloppy terminology, again), and misinterpreted his question as being about which media to use. He WILL need to know that, if he doesn't already, but NOT UNTIL he has connected the drive. He ASKED about selecting the drive. ABSOLUTELY, IN ADDITION to the simple answer, NOT INSTEAD of it. And yet, you apparently took offense at Allison's summation and itemization of the disk types! I submit that my grumpiness is not unique here. YOU are thinking of the WordPervert question (around the same time). THIS was about external flux transition drive box. TWO DIFFERENT THREADS! Is THAT what we're arguing about? I went back and noticed that you replied to BOTH threads in consecutive messages. Later, in THIS discussion, I find that I conflated both of those two replies. :-) OTHER thread and using YOUR give exhaustive instead of over-simplification exhortation, . . . :-) The diskettes that existed during the first year or two of the TRS80 and Apple2 did NOT have hub rings. Tht included Verbatim (prior to their redesign of "Datalife"), Memorex, Dysan? BASF, etc. Hub rings were introduced LATER. It was easy to add hub rings to disks. Inmac (GIGANTIC mail-order office supply in USA) sold kits for that (as well as the Berkeley Microcomputer Flip-Jig) NOT ALL early disks got retrofitted with hub rings! Therefore, a disk without a hubring is an early 5.25" "SSSD" ("Single Sided Single Density") OR an early 5.25" "DSSD" OR an early 5.25" "SSDD" OR an early 5.25" "DSDD" OR a 5.25" "DSHD" A disk WITH a hubring is either a LATER "low density" :-) disk, OR an "HD" disk that was owned by somebody who had been in it since the early days, and hadn't yet run out of hub-rings in their retrofit kit. (In another DIFFERENT thread recently, Eric Smith asked about hub-rings to replenish his retrofit kit) Similarly, in identifying drives, . . . :-) LOTS of confusion existed, since the drives look similar. VERY similar. IBM "solved" the problem, in typical IBM form, by embossing a "star" on the front-plate of the "360K" drives that they made from then on. It never occurred to them that they would get better saturation if they did it to the NEW type of drive, instead. Therefore, a drive with a star is a "360K" drive made after the introduction of "1.2M" drives by somebody affiliated with, or copying, IBM; a drive WITHOUT a star is a "1.2M" drive, OR a "360K" drive made before the introduction of "1.2M" drives, OR a drive made by anybody who didn't give a fig what IBM did. LESS THAN HALF of the ones in USA! That brand is UNKNOWN in USA. (But you probably weren't subjected to ones such as "Elephant") I, ALSO. conflated the two threads. All of the above is from the "Re: DD versus HD 5.25" floppy drives" thread about external flux transition drive box. However, the below is from the "Re: Copying 5.25 inch floppy disks" thread about WordPervert disks in a stock drive system. . . . and I thought that it was a great silly response. You didn't NEED a smiley. If people need smilies to understand that Jonathan Swift or Douglas Admas are speaking humourously, then the world is a sad place. (although admittedly, somebody who is over-saturated with American "HUMOR" might not get British HUMOUR.) I'm sorry that you did not find the imagery of things duplicating out of control, with its overly silly presentation in "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" in Disney's "Fantasia", funny. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com