From: John Kim (jokim_at_CHS.CUSD.CLAREMONT.EDU)
Date: Tue Jan 04 1994 - 15:10:31 EST
>> or a SCSI controller. It may just be a matter of the Unixes you've
>> tried not supporting the 2.88 drive rather than IBM deliberately
>> making their floppy incompatible. The one Unix I tried (SCO UNIX)
>> booted off and recognized the floppy just fine.
> I'd like to see so much as IBM themselves supporting 2.88 disks. I
> wonder if they ever distribute programs on 2.88 media?
I suspect it's more a matter of there being so few 2.88 drives out there
right now that it's not practical. One thing I think I will do though is
move the backup I have for my dictionary program from 12 720k diskettes to
3 2.88 diskettes. Of course that leaves me with 12 blank 720k diskettes and
I despise 720k diskettes, but in this case I don't think I'll mind. :)
I forgot to update you guys on my current 1.44MB-formatted-as-2.88MB-disk
experiment. Soon after I bought my 750, I found out a bug in OS/2 was
failing to detect my HD disks were HD and was formatting them as 2.88 MB.
I used 6 such formatted diskettes to backup a bunch of software in ZIP
format. Because it's ZIPped, I can test the files for integrity fairly
easily.
As of December 24, they've passed the 1-month test w/o data loss. It seems
reasonably safe. Does anyone know if stuff is written on diskettes from the
inside out or outside in? The inside tracks are the densest so I'd think
most problems would show up there. I may be missing some data points since
most of my backups don't fill the entire diskette.
-- John H. Kim | "In fact, Chicago does support security. The sec- jokim_at_jarthur.cs.hmc.edu | urity APIs are there; they just don't do anything." This mail sent by NUPop | - Brad Silverber, VP Microsoft personal systems
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:52:16 EST