psfales@ihlpl.UUCP (03/02/87)
In article <3158@gitpyr.gatech.EDU>, jkg@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (Jim Greenlee) writes: > In article <389@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes: > >I boot. I'm thinking about changing over to a > >96 TPI drive, and want DOS 3.2 for DRIVER.SYS. > I don't think it is strictly necessary to go to DOS 3.2 for the 96 tpi drives. I have been using a 96 tpi drive in my 6300 by using DOS 3.1 and an installable driver written by a company in California called Western Systems and Components. I can't recommend their driver because it doesn't work (I had to disassemble and rewrite some key parts of it it to get it to work), but onced fixed it works very well. Sure cuts down the number of backup disks. This at least indicates that the concept is valid. The company has claimed for several months to be working on an improved version that fixes the bugs, but I have not seen anything yet. They also claim that the driver will read both 40 and 80 track disks in the 80 track drive, but that also does not work on the 6300. If anyone has pointers to similar software, I would be interested in hearing about it. -- Peter Fales UUCP: ...ihnp4!ihlpl!psfales work: (312) 979-7784 AT&T Information Systems, IW 1Z-243 1100 E. Warrenville Rd., IL 60566
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (03/03/87)
I think what I really want, versus just a thought is to have the 16 bit FAT that DOS 3.2 will provide for my fixed disk drive. Having DRIVER.SYS is really a secondary consideration. Also beneficial is the fact that it doesn't require hacking somebody else's code. I guess that AT&T is going to be releasing their own DOS 3.2 in the future, so I might just wait-- provided it hits the streets by June of 1987, or so. I thought I might give Xerox a call, as somebody mentioned that they are already selling 3.2 fore the 606x machines which are, of course, compatible with the 6300. --Bill