Re: The Name of the disk (Was: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

http://www.retrotechnology.com/herbs_stuff/drive.html
is more detailed than the 

On 8/10/17 1:32 PM, Tom Gardner via cctalk wrote:
> Me too - great rant.

Re: Disk imaging progress (was: Disk imaging with IMD - question)

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Hmmm. Sounds like I should get the original drives from the VCF warehouse at 
Infoage. 

Thanks Chuck. 


Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Saturday, August 12, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

On 08/12/2017 05:30 PM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:

> OK, so this is interesting. Since the CW was working using the test 
> previously described, 
> 
> I tried imaging the non-critical disks. None would read successfully. So, I 
> moved
> 
> everything to the other machine with the better floppy controller and IMD 
> couldn’t
> 
> do much with them either using the “analyze” option. It read some tracks, but 
> not all, 
> 
> and I got bored after about 30 tracks. They definitely are 512b sectors but 
> the gap 
> 
> lengths were crazy (G1=210 and G2=255).

This is where I'd suspect that the originals were written with a
mis-aligned drive. I've run into this myself and have a drive reserved
for "tweaking" the alignment. That is, it's not suitable for writing
disks as the alignment is fiddled with, depending on requirements.

Of course, disks written with a mis-aligned drive will read just fine on
the same drive.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging progress (was: Disk imaging with IMD - question)

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/12/2017 05:30 PM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:

> OK, so this is interesting. Since the CW was working using the test 
> previously described, 
> 
> I tried imaging the non-critical disks. None would read successfully. So, I 
> moved
> 
> everything to the other machine with the better floppy controller and IMD 
> couldn’t
> 
> do much with them either using the “analyze” option. It read some tracks, but 
> not all, 
> 
> and I got bored after about 30 tracks. They definitely are 512b sectors but 
> the gap 
> 
> lengths were crazy (G1=210 and G2=255).

This is where I'd suspect that the originals were written with a
mis-aligned drive.   I've run into this myself and have a drive reserved
for "tweaking" the alignment.  That is, it's not suitable for writing
disks as the alignment is fiddled with, depending on requirements.

Of course, disks written with a mis-aligned drive will read just fine on
the same drive.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging progress (was: Disk imaging with IMD - question)

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

 

On 8/12/17, 4:31 PM, "cctalk on behalf of Fred Cisin via cctalk" 
 wrote:

 

    On Sat, 12 Aug 2017, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:

 

>> I have four “non critical” disks from this system – says 

>> “Utilities”, “Norton Utilities”, “DOS SSSD” and “DOS 

>> DSDD” that I will image next and use Dave’s conversion tool to get 

>> them into the IMD format so I can view the contents.

    

   > Now that it is working this far, will IMD work directly?  Or is that still 

   > hung up?

   >I'd like to know which format those are in.

   >Earlier SCP?

   >later MS-DOS?

   >Do you know the dates of the disks?

  

OK, so this is interesting. Since the CW was working using the test previously 
described, 

I tried imaging the non-critical disks. None would read successfully. So, I 
moved

everything to the other machine with the better floppy controller and IMD 
couldn’t

do much with them either using the “analyze” option. It read some tracks, but 
not all, 

and I got bored after about 30 tracks. They definitely are 512b sectors but the 
gap 

lengths were crazy (G1=210 and G2=255).

 

Either these disks have not successfully survived over time, or something else 
is up.

The system associated with these use a Tarbell DD controller which is based on 
the

WD1793 controller chip. I did take one of the Seattle disks and tried to read 
it and

I got the same results. I also have Teledisk but the results are similar.

 

As far as the dates, only the Seattle-labeled disks have dates on them 
(1979-1983). The

disks above just have handwritten labels with no details.

 

At this point I think I really need to get the controller working so maybe I 
can use an 

alternative method to backup the disks.

 

Rich

 

 

Re: Disk imaging progress (was: Disk imaging with IMD - question)

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Sat, 12 Aug 2017, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
The Catweasel MK1 and the QT242 combination seems to work well. I took 
the 8” MSDOS disk I created this morning, made an image of it, wrote 
it back to a blank disk and it booted. Running Norton Disk Doctor on it 
resulted in no reported errors.


A reasonable test of the hardware and system software.
Also, visually inspect the disks run in those drives to confirm that 
there's no crud on the heads scarring the media.
I would now bypass the write enable switch, to hardware write-protect the 
drive (yes, I have occasionally issued WRONG command!)


I have four “non critical” disks from this system – says 
“Utilities”, “Norton Utilities”, “DOS SSSD” and “DOS 
DSDD” that I will image next and use Dave’s conversion tool to get 
them into the IMD format so I can view the contents.


Now that it is working this far, will IMD work directly?  Or is that still 
hung up?


I'd like to know which format those are in.
Earlier SCP?
later MS-DOS?
Do you know the dates of the disks?


"Utilities" could mean a lot of different things.
Some utilities provided with the OS, such as MODE.COM and FORMAT.COM 
differed from one OEM version to another.  Source code for those, if 
found, should be especially enlightening.
Some programs of that era are very hard to find now, such as the original 
assembler and hex-to-.COM (much earlier than MASM, and did not have the 
COBOL-reminiscent source file overhead - I used to give my students a 
"your code goes here" MASM template, and not explain the overhead until 
they had successfully created a program to put their name on the screen)



"Norton Utilities"? First version of Norton Futilities that I'm aware of 
was about 6 months after 5150 announcement.  Be exceptionally careful 
about running ANY of those programs, since it wasn't until later that they 
learned [the hard way] that "fixing" a disk should not happen without 
knowledgeable consent.  For example running 1.0 CHKDSK on a 1.1 or 2.0 
disk would "fix" it destructively.  THAT was why they eventually added 
Int21h fn30h, in order to refuse to run on the wrong DOS version, but, of 
course even that won't help if the disk format is one that CHKDSK 
misunderstands.




Ahhh, good progress. I need a beer as a reward!


Indeed!
You've earned it!


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

Disk imaging progress (was: Disk imaging with IMD - question)

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

…continuing…

The Catweasel MK1 and the QT242 combination seems to work well. I took the 8” 
MSDOS disk I created this morning, made an image of it, wrote it back to a 
blank disk and it booted. Running Norton Disk Doctor on it resulted in no 
reported errors.

I have four “non critical” disks from this system – says “Utilities”, “Norton 
Utilities”, “DOS SSSD” and “DOS DSDD” that I will image next and use Dave’s 
conversion tool to get them into the IMD format so I can view the contents.

Ahhh, good progress. I need a beer as a reward!

Rich
 
--
Rich Cini
http://www.classiccmp.org/cini
http://www.classiccmp.org/altair32
 

On 8/12/17, 11:48 AM, "Richard Cini"  wrote:

I spent a bit of time on this yesterday. I have four QT242s (all were NOS 
but two had broken plastic disk guides). It turns out that the only drive that 
works is one of the ones with broken plastic. So, I did a little swapping, 
connected it to my PC/AT and I now have MS-DOS 6.22 on an 8” floppy. 

Now, on to imaging. I located my Catweasel card – a CW ISA model. I also 
downloaded CW2DMK from Tim Mann so I want to play with that tonight. Even 
though the image format isn’t what I’d prefer, at least I want to try to image 
and re-create the MSDOS disk just to see if it all works.

I would still like to find a spare 8” drive of some sort – time to troll 
ePay or maybe if someone on-list has a decent spare I can buy, please contact 
me separately.

More to come – still lots of work to do on the Tarbell controller.

Rich
 
--
Rich Cini
http://www.classiccmp.org/cini
http://www.classiccmp.org/altair32
 

On 8/10/17, 1:00 PM, "cctalk on behalf of Al Kossow via cctalk" 
 wrote:


www.vcfed.org/forum/showthread.php?55277-Selecting-an-8-quot-floppy-drive

for someone else's opinion of the Qume PsOS

On 8/10/17 9:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/10/17 9:25 AM, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still 
have about a dozen of them as NOS.
> 
> Glad they work out for you. Fairlight people like them, so I've been 
giving them away to them.
> I wont' try to recover anything I care about on those.
> 
> 

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

I spent a bit of time on this yesterday. I have four QT242s (all were NOS but 
two had broken plastic disk guides). It turns out that the only drive that 
works is one of the ones with broken plastic. So, I did a little swapping, 
connected it to my PC/AT and I now have MS-DOS 6.22 on an 8” floppy. 

Now, on to imaging. I located my Catweasel card – a CW ISA model. I also 
downloaded CW2DMK from Tim Mann so I want to play with that tonight. Even 
though the image format isn’t what I’d prefer, at least I want to try to image 
and re-create the MSDOS disk just to see if it all works.

I would still like to find a spare 8” drive of some sort – time to troll ePay 
or maybe if someone on-list has a decent spare I can buy, please contact me 
separately.

More to come – still lots of work to do on the Tarbell controller.

Rich
 
--
Rich Cini
http://www.classiccmp.org/cini
http://www.classiccmp.org/altair32
 

On 8/10/17, 1:00 PM, "cctalk on behalf of Al Kossow via cctalk" 
 wrote:

www.vcfed.org/forum/showthread.php?55277-Selecting-an-8-quot-floppy-drive

for someone else's opinion of the Qume PsOS

On 8/10/17 9:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/10/17 9:25 AM, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still have 
about a dozen of them as NOS.
> 
> Glad they work out for you. Fairlight people like them, so I've been 
giving them away to them.
> I wont' try to recover anything I care about on those.
> 
> 

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

So based on this entire thread I should probably hunt down some Shugart 850s to 
be safe. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Friday, August 11, 2017, Christian Corti via cctalk  
wrote:

On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:
> My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still have about 
> a dozen of them as NOS. I believe they were made in 1993.

If you mean the Y-E DATA YD-180, well, they are QumeTrack 242 ;-)

Christian

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Christian Corti via cctalk]

On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:
My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still have about 
a dozen of them as NOS. I believe they were made in 1993.


If you mean the Y-E DATA YD-180, well, they are QumeTrack 242 ;-)

Christian

RE: The Name of the disk (Was: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Tom Gardner via cctalk]

Me too - great rant.
Thanks
Tom

-Original Message-
From: Mark J. Blair [mailto:n...@nf6x.net] 
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 9:56 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: The Name of the disk (Was: Disk imaging with IMD - question


> On Aug 9, 2017, at 12:08, Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
wrote:
> 
> 
[...]
> 


I'm keeping your rant as reference material. Thanks!

The Tandy Portable Disk Drive (TPDD) for the Model 100 series is one of the
odd-ball "rare" configurations: 3.5", 40 track (later, 80 track on the
TPDD2), single sided, two (!) sectors of 1280 bytes each per track. Disk
capacities are nominally called "100k" or "200k". I have not yet tried
examining a TPDD disk on some sort of imaging setup to get insight into its
low-level format, but that's on my growing "one of these days" list. The
drives had internal controllers and brains, and connected to the computer
over an RS-232 interface.

-- 
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <n...@nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk]

Quoting Al Kossow via cctalk :


On 8/10/17 9:25 AM, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:

My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still  
have about a dozen of them as NOS.


Glad they work out for you. Fairlight people like them, so I've been  
giving them away to them.

I wont' try to recover anything I care about on those.


They've served me well so far. Is there as particular problem with  
these that I should be aware of?

Re: The Name of the disk (Was: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Ali via cctalk]

> On Aug 9, 2017, at 12:08, Fred Cisin via cctalk  
> wrote:> 
> 
[...]
> 


>I'm keeping your rant as reference >material. Thanks!
I second that! Fred ranting is a good thing ;). Generally there are a number of 
good posts here that go into my archive folder for future reference. I just 
wish I had more time to make use of material. :(

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

www.vcfed.org/forum/showthread.php?55277-Selecting-an-8-quot-floppy-drive

for someone else's opinion of the Qume PsOS

On 8/10/17 9:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/10/17 9:25 AM, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still have about 
>> a dozen of them as NOS.
> 
> Glad they work out for you. Fairlight people like them, so I've been giving 
> them away to them.
> I wont' try to recover anything I care about on those.
> 
> 

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 8/10/17 9:25 AM, camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk wrote:

> My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still have about 
> a dozen of them as NOS.

Glad they work out for you. Fairlight people like them, so I've been giving 
them away to them.
I wont' try to recover anything I care about on those.

Re: The Name of the disk (Was: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Mark J. Blair via cctalk]

> On Aug 9, 2017, at 12:08, Fred Cisin via cctalk  wrote:
> 
> 
[...]
> 


I'm keeping your rant as reference material. Thanks!

The Tandy Portable Disk Drive (TPDD) for the Model 100 series is one of the 
odd-ball "rare" configurations: 3.5", 40 track (later, 80 track on the TPDD2), 
single sided, two (!) sectors of 1280 bytes each per track. Disk capacities are 
nominally called "100k" or "200k". I have not yet tried examining a TPDD disk 
on some sort of imaging setup to get insight into its low-level format, but 
that's on my growing "one of these days" list. The drives had internal 
controllers and brains, and connected to the computer over an RS-232 interface.

-- 
Mark J. Blair, NF6X 
http://www.nf6x.net/

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[camiel.vanderhoeven--- via cctalk]

Quoting Chuck Guzis via cctalk :


On 08/10/2017 01:29 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote:


That really depends on the drive. Ok, I think the Qume is "smart"
enough to inhibit any write to side 1 on a SS media. But OTOH, many
other drives are just happy doing anything that you request (e.g. the
BASF drives I also use).


Well, I'll add that the Qume drives aren't my favorites--my workhorse
drives are Siemens FDD-200.  Really well-built units with lots of jumper
options.

The Qume 842s that I use are as backups.   In general, I don't care for
half-height 8" units of any manufacture.  Like the slimline 5.25" and
3.5" drives, they don't seem to hold up as well as their larger relatives.


My workhorse 8" drives are some Ye-Data half-height ones. I still have  
about a dozen of them as NOS. I believe they were made in 1993.


Camiel

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/10/2017 01:29 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote:

> That really depends on the drive. Ok, I think the Qume is "smart"
> enough to inhibit any write to side 1 on a SS media. But OTOH, many
> other drives are just happy doing anything that you request (e.g. the
> BASF drives I also use).

Well, I'll add that the Qume drives aren't my favorites--my workhorse
drives are Siemens FDD-200.  Really well-built units with lots of jumper
options.

The Qume 842s that I use are as backups.   In general, I don't care for
half-height 8" units of any manufacture.  Like the slimline 5.25" and
3.5" drives, they don't seem to hold up as well as their larger relatives.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 8/10/17 1:29 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Chuck Guzis wrote:
>> I'll try again--it doesn't matter if the Qume 242 (I've got one)

I have a pretty strong dislike for the Qume drives, the 242 in particular
seems to like to eat the top side of media.

The design of the head actuator makes the heads
really difficult to clean.

I switched back to a SA 851, took off the plastic cover over the heads, and
cleaning the heads is easy.

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Christian Corti via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Richard Cini wrote:

Will do. These 242 drives are NOS and I have several. I'll swap them too.


One more note about QumeTrack 242 drives:
I have the problem that the head load is very sticky (on both of my 
drives). I had to clean and oil it to make it working again. But still, if 
the drive is unused for a couple of days, it needs some tries before it 
will correctly load the heads.


Christian

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Christian Corti via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Chuck Guzis wrote:

I'll try again--it doesn't matter if the Qume 242 (I've got one) is a
DSDD drive if you're using SS media.  Peek inside the drive and you'll
see that there are *two* index sensors--one for single-sided and the
other for double-sided media.  Unless you've got a hole punch handy, you
can't format single-sided media to use both sides.


That really depends on the drive. Ok, I think the Qume is "smart" enough 
to inhibit any write to side 1 on a SS media. But OTOH, many other drives 
are just happy doing anything that you request (e.g. the BASF drives I 
also use).


Oh BTW, speaking of Qume 242: this is the drive I have currently attached 
to my PC (running Linux) and that I use with my TI development board for 
doing flux level images. This drive *can't* handle hard sectored disks!

Unless... (yeah, there's a way) you do the following:
- remove jumper C (HEAD LOAD input)
- install jumper D (IN USE input)
- connect the left pin of jumper C (HEAD LOAD input) to the top pin of
  jumper HA (going to pin 10 of IC 2G)
You need to issue DRIVE SELECT *and* HEAD LOAD *and* IN USE to access the 
drive.


Christian

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Mike -- 

I gave Bill Degnan the backstory in another thread but in short, I'm working on 
restoring VCF's Seattle Gazelle. It uses a DSDD drive system, although the 
original drives are still at Infoage. I have the original Seattle disks. The 
system was shelved in the mid-1990's. 

I have the system booting to the monitor (after performing all of the usual 
power supply work) but the main task is getting the disks imaged before getting 
everything booting using the original hardware. 

I have a PC/AT with an Adaptec HD/floppy card that per Dave should work for all 
density combinations. It indeed passes with a Teac 1.2Mb drive. 

So the plan is to connect an 8" drive to it and use it as an "imaging machine". 
So yes, to read and write 8" disks. 

The MSDOS part was just a simple way to test that the controller and drive 
worked as expected before working on original Seattle disks that aren't 
replaceable. There is MS Pascal, Norton Utilities, SCP-DOS and two versions of 
MSDOS (1.25 and 2.0). There are also some disks that may have code/sources on 
them. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Mike Stein via cctech <cct...@classiccmp.org> 
wrote:


- Original Message - 
From: "Richard Cini via cctech" <cct...@classiccmp.org>
To: "Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cct...@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 8:54 PM
Subject: Disk imaging with IMD - question


Guys –

I’m working on a restoration project for VCF that requires imaging 8” disks 
(both SSSD and DSDD, mostly for the Tarbell controller) but I’m having trouble 
with it reading disks. So, I wanted to run through what I’ve done and see if 
I’m missing anything. 

It took me a while to hunt down a controller that would work with the PC/AT I 
have on the bench and that would pass all of the testfdc tests. The floppy 
drives are both 1.2MB drives. I located an Adaptec AHA-1522F. Testfdc passes.

Next, I connected my 8” drive (a QumeTrak 242) to the controller using the 8” 
floppy interface adapter from DBit. On reboot, the BIOS seeks the drive no 
problem so I would say that the physical interface works. 

I tried formatting an 8” DSDD disk for MSDOS and I can’t get that to work (not 
sure why since the 8” drive should be similar to the 1.2MB). Rerunning the 
testfdc program fails all tests with the 8”, and it doesn’t successfully read 
any of the non-critical sample disks I have.

Not sure this is enough for someone to go on, but I thought I’d throw it out 
there. 

As a separate question, what kind of disk imaging setups are people using for 
8” disks? 

Thanks!
-
Hi Rich,

I'm not clear on what you're trying to do; archive 8" disks on a PC, create 8" 
disks on a PC, or both? 

Where does MS-DOS format come in? What system uses a Tarbell controller to 
read/write MS-DOS disks?

Probably not relevant for you but since you asked, FWIW I use a Cromemco system 
to DD/TAR/FTAR 8" disks to a file and then either copy that to a PC over a 
serial connection or copy it to a 3.5" or 5.25" HD disk that both the Cromemco 
and the PC can read & write.

m



Rich



--

Rich Cini

http://www.classiccmp.org/cini

http://www.classiccmp.org/altair32

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 03:06 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:

> Yes.
> It is not clear whether the issue is with the disks, or with the
> hardware setup.

Again, maybe I'm reading too much into the comments, but I thought that
Rich had formatted a floppy using IMD and verified using the Analyze
function.

If IMD formats successfully, you can also run the "Test RPM" function,
which uses any readable header on a track (FM or MFM) to time the
rotation speed.   If IMD can't see any headers, it won't do the RPM test.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Will do. These 242 drives are NOS and I have several. I'll swap them too. 

Lots to do this weekend!

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

There's also the possibility that the drive alignment is so far out of
whack that you're not seeing the data on the SCP disks. This is
unlikely in drives that haven't been diddled with, but unless you bought
the drive NOS, you don't know that.

Grab a known-good 8" floppy--the format doesn't really matter, as long
as it's fairly IBM 3740 compliant (Single-side, single-density, 128 byte
FM sectors). An RX01 floppy is good for that. See what IMD shows.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

I think I have a Cromemco 16FDC laying around. Might be able to put a quick 
S100 Z80 system together. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Fred Cisin  wrote:

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, rich.c...@verizon.net wrote:
> Hmmm. I might have. CW in my storage area. Good idea. I don't know the 
> version of if I have the software. Let me look later. Great idea.

alternatively, do you have ANY computer with 8" drive and WD 179x 
controller?

It's not too big a deal to write code to read a track into RAM, and then 
look at it.

I used to play with TRAKCESS on TRS-80

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:

There's also the possibility that the drive alignment is so far out of
whack that you're not seeing the data on the SCP disks.   This is
unlikely in drives that haven't been diddled with, but unless you bought
the drive NOS, you don't know that.


While radial alignment would get in the way of reading those disks, it 
shouldn't affect his attempts to format a disk




Grab a known-good 8" floppy--the format doesn't really matter, as long
as it's fairly IBM 3740 compliant (Single-side, single-density, 128 byte
FM sectors).  An RX01 floppy is good for that.  See what IMD shows.


Yes.
It is not clear whether the issue is with the disks, or with the hardware 
setup.

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

There's also the possibility that the drive alignment is so far out of
whack that you're not seeing the data on the SCP disks.   This is
unlikely in drives that haven't been diddled with, but unless you bought
the drive NOS, you don't know that.

Grab a known-good 8" floppy--the format doesn't really matter, as long
as it's fairly IBM 3740 compliant (Single-side, single-density, 128 byte
FM sectors).  An RX01 floppy is good for that.  See what IMD shows.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, rich.c...@verizon.net wrote:
Hmmm. I might have. CW in my storage area. Good idea. I don't know the 
version of if I have the software. Let me look later. Great idea.


alternatively, do you have ANY computer with 8" drive and WD 179x 
controller?


It's not too big a deal to write code to read a track into RAM, and then 
look at it.


I used to play with TRAKCESS on TRS-80

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 01:47 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:

> That is SO compatible with the NEC 765 chips that I'm going to CALL it
> an NEC chip.
> I wonder if has the same "flash-blind" behavior following index?
> I'll go out on a limb saying that I think that it will NOT give you any
> chaange from using an NEC chip made by NEC or generic chinese, so long
> as they pass Dave's TESTFDC program(s)

The DP8473 is a classic example of a better-than-NEC controller.  It'll
even handle 128-byte MFM sectors, something the 765 fails miserably on.

Handy for those old 30-sector Superbrain 5.25" floppies...

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Hmmm. I might have. CW in my storage area. Good idea. I don't know the version 
of if I have the software. Let me look later. Great idea. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Fred Cisin  wrote:

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote:
> Interesting reading here under disk formats:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS
> Sounds like there were two Tarbell controllers, single and double 
> density but both single-sided ?

NO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS#Disk_formats
includes a 1232K DSDD 8" format, with Tarbell 1791/1793

> Also sounds like the FAT12 disk formats were not quite MS-DOS compatible...

Well, the LAST ones, . . . 
even then, "modern" MS-DOS handles a VERY limited repertoire of the FAT12 
MS-DOS formats.


Do you have access to a flux-transition board (CP, Cat-weasel,Kryoflux, 
etc.)?

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote:

Interesting reading here under disk formats:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS
Sounds like there were two Tarbell controllers, single and double 
density but both single-sided ?


NO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS#Disk_formats
includes a 1232K DSDD 8" format, with Tarbell 1791/1793


Also sounds like the FAT12 disk formats were not quite MS-DOS compatible...


Well, the LAST ones, . . . 
even then, "modern" MS-DOS handles a VERY limited repertoire of the FAT12 
MS-DOS formats.



Do you have access to a flux-transition board (CP, Cat-weasel,Kryoflux, 
etc.)?

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 01:29 PM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
> I don't have the screen print handy but if you look on Dave Dunfield's site 
> under Disk/Software he has a controller registry. I'm using the Adaptec 
> AHA-1522A which uses the National DP8437AV chip. 

That should work with most common WD1793 formats.

However, there's always the odd chance that there's something really
strange about these disks.  I assume that the IMD "analyze" function
gives no results either.

This is where I'd probably pull out the Catweasel and see what's going on.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
Thanks Fred. The Adaptec controller I'm using has a NatSemi controller 
and passes all IMD tests. I have an SBC floating around with a WD37xx 
chip so maybe I'll try that this weekend.


That is SO compatible with the NEC 765 chips that I'm going to CALL it an 
NEC chip.

I wonder if has the same "flash-blind" behavior following index?
I'll go out on a limb saying that I think that it will NOT give you any 
chaange from using an NEC chip made by NEC or generic chinese, so long as 
they pass Dave's TESTFDC program(s)



I don't think that any of the Gazelle formats described in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS#Disk_formats
should provide any significant problems for a FM capable NEC chip.
BUT, I could  be wrong, and the 1793 is CAPABLE of doing things that NEC 
can't tolerate.


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

I don't have the screen print handy but if you look on Dave Dunfield's site 
under Disk/Software he has a controller registry. I'm using the Adaptec 
AHA-1522A which uses the National DP8437AV chip. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

On 08/09/2017 12:41 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:

> My naming convention is flawed. I think that at one point Western
> Digital made an "NEC compatible" controller, that isn't what I call
> "wd-style"

Yup, the WD37C65. Anyone need any? I've got a tubeful that I'm never
going to use. Used in the 8-bit ISA WD1002A-FOX controller board--and
a number of other similar ones, such as the Sysgen Omnibridge.

Downside of this particular chip is that it uses two crystals (an 8MHz
and a 9.6MHz one), unlike later "PC-AT controller on a chip" ICs, that
generally used either a single 24 or 48 MHz crystal.

Patterned, as Fred said, after the NEC uPD765/Inel 8272 and very unlike
the WD 17xx and 27xx chips.

Rich, you said your setup passed fdtest. Specifically, what portions of
it? It's a rare FDC that will pass all of the tests.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Thanks Fred. The Adaptec controller I'm using has a NatSemi controller and 
passes all IMD tests. I have an SBC floating around with a WD37xx chip so maybe 
I'll try that this weekend. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Fred Cisin via cctalk  
wrote:

> If you can use IMD to format both FM and MFM at 500Kbps on your 242--and
> "Analyze" reads the format okay, your SCP disks aren't probably standard
> IBM 3740 or System/3 type diskettes. They could be in a proprietary
> recording format, such as Intel MMFM or Futuredata GCR.

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
> Thanks Chuck. The Gazelle uses the Tarbell DD controller which uses a 
> 1793 which I believe is 3742 and s/34 compatible.

The [WD] 1793 is normally used for "standard" FM and MFM formats
(What I call "IBM/WD Stle formats", and that I think Chuck called "IMD 
formats")

BUT, it could be used for some OTHER formats that the NEC-style FDC can't 
handle, since unlike the NEC-style chips, the WD-style chips have the 
capability of a "track write"/"track read", with seriously different 
sector header structures.
Not enough diffeernt to do GCR, but maybe enough to do Amiga?

The NEC can do a multi-sector read/write, but that isn't the same, and it 
can't do ANYTHING other than "IBM/WD-style" formats.

PC normally uses an NEC-style controller, and that is the only type that 
the BIOS supports.
At one point, there was an after-market WD-style controller with device 
driver support, but the added capabilities weren't enough to make it a 
market success.
If anybody has one, it has the capability of reading a number of disks 
that the NEC can't.


My naming convention is flawed. I think that at one point Western Digital 
made an "NEC compatible" controller, that isn't what I call "wd-style"


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

There's a way to make the disk more compatible by changing the media ID byte, 
but I don't even need that right now. 

I'd have to pull the manual but I believe the TDD is one or two sided. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Mike Stein <mhs.st...@gmail.com> wrote:

Interesting reading here under disk formats:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS

Sounds like there were two Tarbell controllers, single and double density but 
both single-sided ?

Also sounds like the FAT12 disk formats were not quite MS-DOS compatible...

m

- Original Message - 
From: "Richard Cini via cctalk" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
To: <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question


> Thanks Chuck. The Gazelle uses the Tarbell DD controller which uses a 1793 
> which I believe is 3742 and s/34 compatible. 
> 
> Rich
> 
> Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail
> 
>
On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> 
wrote:
> 
> On 08/09/2017 10:57 AM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> "DON'T ASSUME..." AS THEY SAY ON TV. I'M OK WITH THE ADDITIONAL CLARITY. 
>> SINCE YOU HAVE A WORKING 242, WOULD YOU MIND CONFIRMING THE JUMPER SETTINGS 
>> FOR ME? JUST TRYING TO ELIMINATE AS MANY POTENTIAL ERROR POINTS. 
> 
> I had a look and a mental fart. I have the 842--the full-height model.
> I suspect that the jumpers are completely different.
> 
> If you can use IMD to format both FM and MFM at 500Kbps on your 242--and
> "Analyze" reads the format okay, your SCP disks aren't probably standard
> IBM 3740 or System/3 type diskettes. They could be in a proprietary
> recording format, such as Intel MMFM or Futuredata GCR.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
>

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 12:41 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:

> My naming convention is flawed.  I think that at one point Western
> Digital made an "NEC compatible" controller, that isn't what I call
> "wd-style"

Yup, the WD37C65.  Anyone need any?  I've got a tubeful that I'm never
going to use.   Used in the 8-bit ISA WD1002A-FOX controller board--and
a number of other similar ones, such as the Sysgen Omnibridge.

Downside of this particular chip is that it uses two crystals (an 8MHz
and a 9.6MHz one), unlike later "PC-AT controller on a chip" ICs, that
generally used either a single 24 or 48 MHz crystal.

Patterned, as Fred said, after the NEC uPD765/Inel 8272 and very unlike
the WD 17xx and 27xx chips.

Rich, you said your setup passed fdtest.  Specifically, what portions of
it?  It's a rare FDC that will pass all of the tests.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote:

Interesting reading here under disk formats:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS
Sounds like there were two Tarbell controllers, single and double 
density but both single-sided ?

Also sounds like the FAT12 disk formats were not quite MS-DOS compatible...


There are also, of course MANY MS-DOS formats that are not PC-DOS 
compatible, nor compatible with "modern" MS-DOS.


Some are hardware incompatible, such as Sirius/Victor 9000.

Some are not recognized by "modern" MS-DOS, but nevertheless are 
straight-forward to read/write with IMD, XenoCopy, 22Disk, etc.
Those range from ones with different sector sizes, to ones that are ALMOST 
PC-DOS, but with different number of DIRectory sectors, etc.

HP
Atari ST
Gavilan
Canon
NEC
etc.

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

If you can use IMD to format both FM and MFM at 500Kbps on your 242--and
"Analyze" reads the format okay, your SCP disks aren't probably standard
IBM 3740 or System/3 type diskettes. They could be in a proprietary
recording format, such as Intel MMFM or Futuredata GCR.


On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
Thanks Chuck. The Gazelle uses the Tarbell DD controller which uses a 
1793 which I believe is 3742 and s/34 compatible.


The [WD] 1793 is normally used for "standard" FM and MFM formats
(What I call "IBM/WD Stle formats", and that I think Chuck called "IMD 
formats")


BUT, it could be used for some OTHER formats that the NEC-style FDC can't 
handle, since unlike the NEC-style chips, the WD-style chips have the 
capability of a "track write"/"track read", with seriously different 
sector header structures.

Not enough diffeernt to do GCR, but maybe enough to do Amiga?

The NEC can do a multi-sector read/write, but that isn't the same, and it 
can't do ANYTHING other than "IBM/WD-style" formats.


PC normally uses an NEC-style controller, and that is the only type that 
the BIOS supports.
At one point, there was an after-market WD-style controller with device 
driver support, but the added capabilities weren't enough to make it a 
market success.
If anybody has one, it has the capability of reading a number of disks 
that the NEC can't.



My naming convention is flawed.  I think that at one point Western Digital 
made an "NEC compatible" controller, that isn't what I call "wd-style"



--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Mike Stein via cctalk]

Interesting reading here under disk formats:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86-DOS

Sounds like there were two Tarbell controllers, single and double density but 
both single-sided ?

Also sounds like the FAT12 disk formats were not quite MS-DOS compatible...

m

- Original Message - 
From: "Richard Cini via cctalk" <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
To: <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question


> Thanks Chuck. The Gazelle uses the Tarbell DD controller which uses a 1793 
> which I believe is 3742 and s/34 compatible. 
> 
> Rich
> 
> Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail
> 
> On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> On 08/09/2017 10:57 AM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> "DON'T ASSUME..." AS THEY SAY ON TV. I'M OK WITH THE ADDITIONAL CLARITY. 
>> SINCE YOU HAVE A WORKING 242, WOULD YOU MIND CONFIRMING THE JUMPER SETTINGS 
>> FOR ME? JUST TRYING TO ELIMINATE AS MANY POTENTIAL ERROR POINTS. 
> 
> I had a look and a mental fart. I have the 842--the full-height model.
> I suspect that the jumpers are completely different.
> 
> If you can use IMD to format both FM and MFM at 500Kbps on your 242--and
> "Analyze" reads the format okay, your SCP disks aren't probably standard
> IBM 3740 or System/3 type diskettes. They could be in a proprietary
> recording format, such as Intel MMFM or Futuredata GCR.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
>

The Name of the disk (Was: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

The structure used on most diskette tracks is based on an IBM design 
(3740, etc.), and was referred to as "IBM format".  BUT, the general 
public think that "IBM" means the machines that followed the 5150, so "IBM 
format" is oft misconstrued to mean PC.  To avoid ambiguity, I sometimes 
call it "IBM/Western Digital style format".


It includes substantial structures, including sector headers, gaps, 
write splice areas, etc., which require a substantial overhead  (about a 
quarter? of the disk capacity), so decisions about how many sectors of 
what size can have an effect on the final usable capacity.  In spite of 
that, in the interest of "uniformity", it is commonplcae to refer to 
different types of diskettes by one of their commonly used formatted 
capacities  ("360K", "1.2M", "720K", "1.4M")  THAT certainly doesn't 
remove all confusion - for example Apple "400K" and "800K" are the same 
diskettes as IBM "720K"


8" disks used a different jacket for double sided disks than single sided, 
with the index hole aperture in a different location.  That let the 
computer recognize which type of diskette was inserted, and therefore to 
refuse to cooperate if the user asked for a different format than that 
diskette had been intended for.


5.25" dropped that, and also reversed the write-protect notch to a write 
enable notch.
Single sided and double sided 5.25" diskettes are interchangeable, and 
single sided ones can be flipped over to use the other side (single sided, 
of course) by punching additional holes in the jackets (cf. Berkeley 
Microcomputer "Flip Jig")

5.25" diskettes were once known as "mini-floppy".

Besides GCR (Commodore, Apple][, Macintosh 400K and 800K, etc.), there are 
a variety of obscure alternate possibilities, such as Amiga MFM but 
without the IBM/WD structures, hard sector, NRZ, FSK?, etc.)


 the drive and disks are double-sided double density. Are you 
saying that's quad density?


AARRGGHH!
Would it work to kill off people that say "quad density"?

Originally, 5.25" disks were single sided 35 track, soon changed to 40 
track.   Diskette was 300 Oersted.

Capacity depended on formatting choices, typically between 80K and 100K.
These disks were an FM ("Frequency Modulation") recording. 
There was NO mention of "density", although some engineers might call it 
"half density", since there is one bit of data for every two pulses/flux 
transitions.


Apple chose to use GCR for their 35 track single sided disks, resulting in 
about 140K.


Then there was MFM ("Modified Frequency Modulation").  The premise was 
that clock pulses/flux transitions weren't reaally needed between adjacent 
data pulses/flux transitions.  That put more space between the 
pulses/transitions, which meant that the data transfer rate could be 
increased (they doubled it), getting about twice as much data per track.

About 1.5? pulses/transitions per data bit.
Depending on format choices, typically between 150K to 200K capacity.
Instead of just calling it "MFM", the marketing people called it "DOUBLE 
DENSITY".


AFTER that, they renamed "FM" to "SINGLE DENSITY".  That means that if you 
look back, historically, you'll find earlier mentions of the phrase 
"double density" then the earliest mentions of "single density".
(The same historical principle applies to the phrases "World War TWO" V 
"World War One" (which had previously just been "the great war"))


But, there was also single sided and then double sided.
hence, SSSD, SSDD, DSSD, DSDD.
Depending on format choices, between 240K and 400K for DSDD.

BUT, the marketing people at Intertec (Superbrain) chose to call DSDD: 
"QUAD density".

They were the only ones who did that.

Soon thereafter, 5.25" disks came out with 96tpi, instead of 48tpi, 
resulting in 80 tracks instead of 40 tracks.  The "density" on each track 
was not affected.

Depending on format choices, between 640K and 800K.

The marketing people of many/most? computer companies called THAT "QUAD 
DENSITY".  (DSDD, with 80 tracks, instead of 40 tracks)

I think that that was a very stupid naming choice.

So, is "quad density": 40 track DSDD (Superbrain)?
or 80 track DSDD (MANY CP/M computers)?
or 1.2M (DSDD with twice the linear density/data transfer rate, where they 
really did get 4 times as much data per track)?



BUT, it gets WORSE!!
Intertec (Superbrain) started making 80 track DSDD (800K?) available. 
But, they had already used "QUAD DENSITY" to refer to 40 track DSDD!  So, 
they called the 80 track DSDD, "SUPER DENSITY"!   If that wasn't bad 
enough, they abbreviated "Super Density" as "SD".

OK, is "SD" FM/single density,
or is "SD" "SUPER DENSITY"?
Thankfully, NOBODY else was THAT stupid.

I have a special fond spot in my heart for Intertec.  At NCC (National 
Computer Conference) in 1983, I stopped by their booth to ask some minor 
questions about their formats for XenoCopy.  (They had multiple formats, 
with their own unique names, inverted the data bits, short-changed 
some of the 

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Thanks Chuck. The Gazelle uses the Tarbell DD controller which uses a 1793 
which I believe is 3742 and s/34 compatible. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

On 08/09/2017 10:57 AM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:

> "DON'T ASSUME..." AS THEY SAY ON TV. I'M OK WITH THE ADDITIONAL CLARITY. 
> SINCE YOU HAVE A WORKING 242, WOULD YOU MIND CONFIRMING THE JUMPER SETTINGS 
> FOR ME? JUST TRYING TO ELIMINATE AS MANY POTENTIAL ERROR POINTS. 

I had a look and a mental fart. I have the 842--the full-height model.
I suspect that the jumpers are completely different.

If you can use IMD to format both FM and MFM at 500Kbps on your 242--and
"Analyze" reads the format okay, your SCP disks aren't probably standard
IBM 3740 or System/3 type diskettes. They could be in a proprietary
recording format, such as Intel MMFM or Futuredata GCR.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 10:57 AM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:

> "DON'T ASSUME..." AS THEY SAY ON TV. I'M OK WITH THE ADDITIONAL CLARITY. 
> SINCE YOU HAVE A WORKING 242, WOULD YOU MIND CONFIRMING THE JUMPER SETTINGS 
> FOR ME? JUST TRYING TO ELIMINATE AS MANY POTENTIAL ERROR POINTS. 

I had a look and a mental fart.  I have the 842--the full-height model.
I suspect that the jumpers are completely different.

If you can use IMD to format both FM and MFM at 500Kbps on your 242--and
"Analyze" reads the format okay, your SCP disks aren't probably standard
IBM 3740 or System/3 type diskettes.  They could be in a proprietary
recording format, such as Intel MMFM or Futuredata GCR.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

See below. Hopefully inline works. I'm not shouting, just using caps. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

On 08/09/2017 09:52 AM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
> It's funny -- I didn't see the original reply from Bill to this
> message.
> 
> I am aware of the track differences and I thought Dos would format
> it but just slam the head for the last three tracks. No such luck. It
> actually complains about the disk from the beginning.
> 
> The Qume 242 is a DSDD drive in case that was asked in the original
> thread, and should work in this situation.


I'll try again--it doesn't matter if the Qume 242 (I've got one) is a
DSDD drive if you're using SS media. Peek inside the drive and you'll
see that there are *two* index sensors--one for single-sided and the
other for double-sided media. Unless you've got a hole punch handy, you
can't format single-sided media to use both sides.

YES I KNOW. I HAVE BOTH KINDS OF MEDIA. RIGHT NOW USING 3M DSDD MEDIA. 

Okay, a DOS format is more than a simple IMD-type format, which does
little more than instruct the FDC to write a bunch of E5-filled sectors
and headers.

OK, DIDNT KNOW THAT. 

A DOS format also writes a boot sector, FAT and root directory. If most
late versions of DOS don't see a valid boot sector, you'll get a
"General Failure" error. If you use IMD to format the disk, use the
"Analyze" option to verify what you've got.

UNDERSTAND WHAT DOS WRITES. I WILL SEE WHAT ACTUALLY GETS WRITTEN. USING 
ANALYZE. 

INTERESTINGLY IMD CLAIMS NOT TO BE ABLE TO READ ONE OF THE DISKS THATS TO BE 
IMAGED -- AN 8" MDSOS 2.0 DISK FROM A GAZELLE. I WOULD CONSIDER THE DISKS IN AN 
UNKNOWN CONDITION. CHICKEN AND EGG. THESE ARE ORIGINAL SCP DISKS SO I DONT WANT 
TO EXPERIMENT MUCH ON THEM. 

I hope I've been clear--lately, I tend to assume too much.

"DON'T ASSUME..." AS THEY SAY ON TV. I'M OK WITH THE ADDITIONAL CLARITY. SINCE 
YOU HAVE A WORKING 242, WOULD YOU MIND CONFIRMING THE JUMPER SETTINGS FOR ME? 
JUST TRYING TO ELIMINATE AS MANY POTENTIAL ERROR POINTS. 

Thanks all. 

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 09:52 AM, Richard Cini via cctalk wrote:
> It's funny -- I didn't see the original reply from Bill to this
> message.
> 
> I am aware of  the track differences and I thought Dos would format
> it but just slam the head for the last three tracks. No such luck. It
> actually complains about the disk from the beginning.
> 
> The Qume 242 is a DSDD drive in case that was asked in the original
> thread, and should work in this situation.


I'll try again--it doesn't matter if the Qume 242 (I've got one) is a
DSDD drive if you're using SS media.  Peek inside the drive and you'll
see that there are *two* index sensors--one for single-sided and the
other for double-sided media.  Unless you've got a hole punch handy, you
can't format single-sided media to use both sides.

Okay, a DOS format is more than a simple IMD-type format, which does
little more than instruct the FDC to write a bunch of E5-filled sectors
and headers.

A DOS format also writes a boot sector, FAT and root directory.  If most
late versions of DOS don't see a valid boot sector, you'll get a
"General Failure" error.   If you use IMD to format the disk, use the
"Analyze" option to verify what you've got.

I hope I've been clear--lately, I tend to assume too much.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Bill -- the drive and disks are double-sided double density. Are you saying 
that's quad density?

I may try a different host setup again. I have five different computers that 
passed the testfdc program with varying levels of success, although none with 
single-density. 

Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, william degnan  wrote:

NOTE - I was able to make a bootable 8" DOS 6.22 disk even though it slammed 
the last three tracks, on my imaging computer.  The computer thought it was 
writing to a 1.2M 5 1/4 disk.

BUT you're saying a quad density SS disk.  I never tried that and if you say it 
does not work then I can't dispute that without trying it myself.

BIll

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Richard Cini via cctalk 
 wrote:
It's funny -- I didn't see the original reply from Bill to this message.

I am aware of  the track differences and I thought Dos would format it but just 
slam the head for the last three tracks. No such luck. It actually complains 
about the disk from the beginning.

The Qume 242 is a DSDD drive in case that was asked in the original thread, and 
should work in this situation.

I tried to format a disk with both IMD and NFORMAT (utility I downloaded) and 
neither products a disk format that DOS likes. I'm sure it's my selection of 
parameters more so than the program itself.



Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

On 08/09/2017 01:41 AM, william degnan wrote:

> How about booting into dos and just formatting a disk that way?

Go back and read what I wrote, Bill. If single-sided media is being
used, DOS formatting will fail as there is no single-sided high-density
format available.

Of course, if double-sided media is used, DOS formatting as a 1.2MB DOS
disk should work--up to track 76. Note that 8" drives are 77
track/cylinder, not 80, as the 5.25" drives are.

IMD can handle the issues quite readily, as its formatting facility will
do whatever you tell it to do.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[william degnan via cctalk]

NOTE - I was able to make a bootable 8" DOS 6.22 disk even though it
slammed the last three tracks, on my imaging computer.  The computer
thought it was writing to a 1.2M 5 1/4 disk.

BUT you're saying a quad density SS disk.  I never tried that and if you
say it does not work then I can't dispute that without trying it myself.

BIll

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Richard Cini via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> It's funny -- I didn't see the original reply from Bill to this message.
>
> I am aware of  the track differences and I thought Dos would format it but
> just slam the head for the last three tracks. No such luck. It actually
> complains about the disk from the beginning.
>
> The Qume 242 is a DSDD drive in case that was asked in the original
> thread, and should work in this situation.
>
> I tried to format a disk with both IMD and NFORMAT (utility I downloaded)
> and neither products a disk format that DOS likes. I'm sure it's my
> selection of parameters more so than the program itself.
>
>
>
> Rich
>
> Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail
>
> On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> On 08/09/2017 01:41 AM, william degnan wrote:
>
> > How about booting into dos and just formatting a disk that way?
>
> Go back and read what I wrote, Bill. If single-sided media is being
> used, DOS formatting will fail as there is no single-sided high-density
> format available.
>
> Of course, if double-sided media is used, DOS formatting as a 1.2MB DOS
> disk should work--up to track 76. Note that 8" drives are 77
> track/cylinder, not 80, as the 5.25" drives are.
>
> IMD can handle the issues quite readily, as its formatting facility will
> do whatever you tell it to do.
>
> --Chuck
>
>
>

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

It's funny -- I didn't see the original reply from Bill to this message. 

I am aware of  the track differences and I thought Dos would format it but just 
slam the head for the last three tracks. No such luck. It actually complains 
about the disk from the beginning. 

The Qume 242 is a DSDD drive in case that was asked in the original thread, and 
should work in this situation. 

I tried to format a disk with both IMD and NFORMAT (utility I downloaded) and 
neither products a disk format that DOS likes. I'm sure it's my selection of 
parameters more so than the program itself. 



Rich

Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:

On 08/09/2017 01:41 AM, william degnan wrote:

> How about booting into dos and just formatting a disk that way? 

Go back and read what I wrote, Bill. If single-sided media is being
used, DOS formatting will fail as there is no single-sided high-density
format available.

Of course, if double-sided media is used, DOS formatting as a 1.2MB DOS
disk should work--up to track 76. Note that 8" drives are 77
track/cylinder, not 80, as the 5.25" drives are.

IMD can handle the issues quite readily, as its formatting facility will
do whatever you tell it to do.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 08/09/2017 01:41 AM, william degnan wrote:

> How about booting into dos and just formatting a disk that way?  

Go back and read what I wrote, Bill.   If single-sided media is being
used, DOS formatting will fail as there is no single-sided high-density
format available.

Of course, if double-sided media is used, DOS formatting as a 1.2MB DOS
disk should work--up to track 76.   Note that 8" drives are 77
track/cylinder, not 80, as the 5.25" drives are.

IMD can handle the issues quite readily, as its formatting facility will
do whatever you tell it to do.

--Chuck

Re: Disk imaging with IMD - question

[william degnan via cctalk]

On Aug 9, 2017 1:34 AM, "Chuck Guzis via cctalk" 
wrote:
>
> Quick question, Rich--what kind of media are you using to test by
> formatting to 1.2MB?
>
> If they're SS media (as indicated by the position of the index
> aperture), your drive will probably barf if you try to access the disk
> as double-sided.   We've all been spoiled by 5.25" and 3.5" media which
> doesn't differentiate between single- or double-sided.
>
> Try using the format capability in IMD to test things.
>
> --Chuck

How about booting into dos and just formatting a disk that way?

Disk imaging with IMD - question

[Richard Cini via cctalk]

Guys –

 

    I’m working on a restoration project for VCF that requires 
imaging 8” disks (both SSSD and DSDD, mostly for the Tarbell controller) but 
I’m having trouble with it reading disks. So, I wanted to run through what I’ve 
done and see if I’m missing anything. 

 

It took me a while to hunt down a controller that would work with the PC/AT I 
have on the bench and that would pass all of the testfdc tests. The floppy 
drives are both 1.2MB drives. I located an Adaptec AHA-1522F. Testfdc passes.

 

Next, I connected my 8” drive (a QumeTrak 242) to the controller using the 8” 
floppy interface adapter from DBit. On reboot, the BIOS seeks the drive no 
problem so I would say that the physical interface works. 

 

I tried formatting an 8” DSDD disk for MSDOS and I can’t get that to work (not 
sure why since the 8” drive should be similar to the 1.2MB). Rerunning the 
testfdc program fails all tests with the 8”, and it doesn’t successfully read 
any of the non-critical sample disks I have.

 

Not sure this is enough for someone to go on, but I thought I’d throw it out 
there. 

 

As a separate question, what kind of disk imaging setups are people using for 
8” disks? 

 

Thanks!

 

Rich

 

--

Rich Cini

http://www.classiccmp.org/cini

http://www.classiccmp.org/altair32