john@tifsie.UUCP (John Maline) (05/05/87)
I'm having a problem with the 1.2M floppy drive on my IBM AT clone. I can often (but now always) read 360K floppys, but I'm batting .000 reading/writing/formatting 1.2M floppys. My setup includes a WD 1003-WA2 hard/floppy controller and an ATTACK286 motherboard (trying to) control a Fujitsu floppy. The controller handles a 22M MiniScribe just fine. Does anyone with some hardware know-how have any ideas? Please mail any help or info. Thanks. -- John Maline UUCP: ut-sally!im4u!ti-csl!tifsie!john Texas Instruments sun!texsun!ti-csl!tifsie!john PO Box 655012 M/S 3618 uiucdcs!convex!smu!tifsie!john Dallas, TX 75265 Voice: (214)995-2139
netoprdc@ncsuvm.bitnet.UUCP (05/13/87)
To the person trying to read a 360k floppy in a 1.2 meg floppy drive,
you should be able to read the disk but you will wipe it
(ah..ha-ha-ha-ha.....wipeout!) when yo try to write to it. The drives
are jst configured differently
ges@gitpyr.UUCP (05/16/87)
In article <62NETOPRDC@NCSUVM>, NETOPRDC@NCSUVM.BITNET writes: > To the person trying to read a 360k floppy in a 1.2 meg floppy drive, > you should be able to read the disk but you will wipe it > (ah..ha-ha-ha-ha.....wipeout!) when yo try to write to it. The drives > are jst configured differently > I have seen 360k floppies written on in 1.2M drives with no ill effects. The floppies were formatted on a 360k drive. The instance I witnessed was a floppy formatted on an IBM XT and written by a IBM AT. The disk was readable by the XT ( and AT) after the write. I beleive that the floppy was a Maxell DS/DD.
mvolo@ecsvax.UUCP (Michael R. Volow) (05/19/87)
Don't depend on 1.2 M drives *dependably* doing this. --Mike Volow, Psychiatry, Durham Veterans Administration Medical Center Durham, NC, 27712 919 383 3568 mvolo@ecsvax.UUCP
psfales@ihlpe.ATT.COM (Peter Fales) (05/19/87)
In article <62NETOPRDC@NCSUVM>, NETOPRDC@NCSUVM.BITNET writes: > To the person trying to read a 360k floppy in a 1.2 meg floppy drive, > you should be able to read the disk but you will wipe it > (ah..ha-ha-ha-ha.....wipeout!) when yo try to write to it. The drives > are jst configured differently Actually, this is far from a guaranteed wipeout. While you are taking a slight chance in writing a 360K disk in a 1.2 meg drive (i.e. don't use this to store critical data), I have never had any problem in doing so. The other direction is a problem. You can't read or write a 1.2 Meg disk in a 360K drive. -- Peter Fales UUCP: ...ihnp4!ihlpe!psfales work: (312) 979-7784 AT&T Information Systems, IW 1Z-243 1100 E. Warrenville Rd., IL 60566
markg@amd.UUCP (05/19/87)
In article <1752@ihlpe.ATT.COM> psfales@ihlpe.ATT.COM (Peter Fales) writes: >In article <62NETOPRDC@NCSUVM>, NETOPRDC@NCSUVM.BITNET writes: >> (ah..ha-ha-ha-ha.....wipeout!) when yo try to write to it. The drives >> are jst configured differently > >Actually, this is far from a guaranteed wipeout. While you are taking >a slight chance in writing a 360K disk in a 1.2 meg drive (i.e. don't >use this to store critical data), I have never had any problem in doing >so. > Does anyone ever bother to read reference manuals??? The following is a quote from the IBM 3.2 DOS Reference Manual pages 1-9, 1-10. High-Capacity Drives You can read and write to: o Single-sided 160/180KB diskettes** o Double-sided 320/360KB diskettes** o High-capacity disketts IMPORTANT: ** If you write on any of these diskette types using a high-capacity drive, you may not be able to read the diskettes in a single-sided or double-sided drive. END-QUOTE. The reason for this is the 1.2m floppy's head is thinner than that of the single/double sided floppy. If anyone wants to go into depth, be my guest. -- Mark Gorlinsky (408) 982-7811 UUCP: {decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amd!markg
stevenj@umbc3.UMD.EDU (Steven Vore ) (05/20/87)
In article <3587@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> ges@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (GERALD E. SULLIVAN) writes: >In article <62NETOPRDC@NCSUVM>, NETOPRDC@NCSUVM.BITNET writes: >> To the person trying to read a 360k floppy in a 1.2 meg floppy drive, >> you should be able to read the disk but you will wipe it > >I have seen 360k floppies written on in 1.2M drives with no ill effects. >The floppies were formatted on a 360k drive. I do it everyday (read/write 360k disks on AT 1.2M drives). The only problem I've had is if I try to FORMAT /4 (or whatever the switch is) a 360k disk on the AT. THEN the XT can't read it. If I format the disk on the AT, I can move it back and forth between both machines with no problems. Mabye I've just been incredibly lucky? Steven J. Vore stevenj@umbc3.umd.edu
madd@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP (05/20/87)
In article <341@umbc3.UMD.EDU> stevenj@umbc3 (Steven Vore (PC)) writes: >In article <3587@gitpyr.gatech.EDU> ges@gitpyr.gatech.EDU (GERALD E. SULLIVAN) writes: >>In article <62NETOPRDC@NCSUVM>, NETOPRDC@NCSUVM.BITNET writes: >>> To the person trying to read a 360k floppy in a 1.2 meg floppy drive, >>> you should be able to read the disk but you will wipe it >> >>I have seen 360k floppies written on in 1.2M drives with no ill effects. >>The floppies were formatted on a 360k drive. > >I do it everyday (read/write 360k disks on AT 1.2M drives). The only problem >I've had is if I try to FORMAT /4 (or whatever the switch is) a 360k disk on >the AT. THEN the XT can't read it. If I format the disk on the AT, I can >move it back and forth between both machines with no problems. Mabye I've >just been incredibly lucky? Could be, but it could also be the 360k drive. In my experiences, some computers have no problems from 1.2M<>360K, while others display the problems that IBM warns about. I know how come the silly 360K disks shouldn't work, but what I'm saying is that *some* *do* work. For instance, I've never had a problem moving diskettes to and from a true blue AT and a Tandy 1000, but moving from the AT to a Leading Edge didn't work at all. At any rate, if you wnat your data you should be careful. I personally recommend reformatting the diskette each time you move between the two systems, and only doing reads on the other system -- no writes. With this method, I've never had a problem with any system. This actually surprizes me, because I would expect the high intensity drive to format a smaller track and possibly leave traces of the 360K signal, but it doesn't seem to do this. Anyone know why? %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Jim Frost * The Madd Hacker | UUCP: ..!harvard!bu-cs!bucsb!madd H H | ARPA: madd@bucsb.bu.edu H-C-C-OH <- heehee +---------+---------------------------------- H H | "We are strangers in a world we never made"
zu@ethz.UUCP (Urs Zurbuchen) (05/22/87)
In article <4008@amd.UUCP> markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: >** If you write on any of these diskette types [180KB or 360KB, ed.] using a >high-capacity drive, you may not be able to read the >diskettes in a single-sided or double-sided drive. Actually, I never had a problem reading data on disks written by a high density drive. I was able to read the data on my own drive, three other high density drives and several low density drives. It didn't matter on which drive the data was written and on which it was read. But, the problem comes in if you're going to FORMAT a floppy with 360KB on a high density disk. None of the other drives mentioned above was able to read such floppies. And it didn't matter on which high density drive they were formatted. Sometimes I even had troubles reading the data with the same drive which did the formatting. ...urs UUCP: ...seismo!mcvax!cernvax!ethz!zu
markg@amd.UUCP (05/26/87)
In article <93@bernina.UUCP> zu@bernina.UUCP (Urs Zurbuchen) writes: >In article <4008@amd.UUCP> markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: >>** If you write on any of these diskette types [180KB or 360KB, ed.] using a >>high-capacity drive, you may not be able to read the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>diskettes in a single-sided or double-sided drive. > >Actually, I never had a problem reading data on disks written by a high >density drive. I'm glad to hear you didn't have have any problems! I, on the other hand did. Not all of my 1.2Mb drives can write on a 360Kb diskette. Reading seems to be no problem at all. Formatting a disk other than a high density in a 1.2Mb drive cannot be accomplished. -- Mark Gorlinsky - AMD Processor Products Division/APPS SQA UUCP: {decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amd!markg AT&T: (408) 982-7811 DISCLAIMER: My opinions are mine, not my employers.
phco@ecsvax.UUCP (John Miller) (05/27/87)
In article <4029@amd.UUCP> markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: >In article <93@bernina.UUCP> zu@bernina.UUCP (Urs Zurbuchen) writes: >Formatting a disk other than a high density in a 1.2Mb drive cannot be >accomplished. I have on numerous occasions formatted 360KB diskettes in 1.2MB drives (using "format /4"), written on them with both 1.2MB and 360KB drives, and then successfully read them in both 1.2MB and 360KB drives. It is true, however, that 1.2MB drives write narrower tracks than 360KB drives, so disks written on 360KB drives and then written over by 1.2MB drives may then be unreadable on 360KB drives, since the wider track of the 360KB drive is not completely obliterated by the 1.2MB drive. It is also true that some drives, of both types, can't deal with this sort of activity. I suppose this is because of faulty alignment in the drives. The old full height floppy drives in the original IBM PC seem to have the worst problems with alignment. We've had many problems in our department transferring floppies from one IBM PC to another (the older models with full height drives). The half height drives see much more reliable. -- John Miller (ecsvax!phco) Dept. of Pharmacology, Univ. of N.C.-Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (919) 966-4343
markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) (05/27/87)
(John Miller) writes: >(Mark Gorlinsky) writes: >>(Urs Zurbuchen) writes: >>Formatting a disk other than a high density in a 1.2Mb drive cannot be >>accomplished. > >I have on numerous occasions formatted 360KB diskettes in 1.2MB drives (using >"format /4"), written on them with both 1.2MB and 360KB drives, and then >successfully read them in both 1.2MB and 360KB drives. After spending many milliseconds reevaluating my comment on the subject of FORMATting a 360Kb in a 1.2Mb drive, I have come to the conclusion that what I said was infact not the whole fact. I dicovered that if I were to use the /4 option, it was possible to FORMAT a 360Kb disk in a 1.2Mb drive. Silly me! I should learn to read the manual more carefully and not ass/u/me that the FORMAT program can tell the difference between a low-density and a high-density disk. I still believe that after formatting a low-density disk in a 1.2Mb drive there will be problems, on some machines, reading the disk. >It is true, however, that 1.2MB drives write narrower tracks than 360KB drives, >so disks written on 360KB drives and then written over by 1.2MB drives may then >be unreadable on 360KB drives, since the wider track of the 360KB drive is not >completely obliterated by the 1.2MB drive. [deleted] -- Mark Gorlinsky - AMD Processor Products Division/APPS SQA UUCP: {decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amd!markg AT&T: (408) 982-7811 DISCLAIMER: My opinions are mine, not my employers.
bpm@homxb.UUCP (05/28/87)
: : I have on numerous occasions formatted 360KB diskettes in 1.2MB drives (using : "format /4"), written on them with both 1.2MB and 360KB drives, and then : successfully read them in both 1.2MB and 360KB drives. : : It is true, however, that 1.2MB drives write narrower tracks than 360KB drives, : so disks written on 360KB drives and then written over by 1.2MB drives may then : be unreadable on 360KB drives, since the wider track of the 360KB drive is not : completely obliterated by the 1.2MB drive. It is also true that some drives, If this is indeed a problem, why not just erase the disk with a bulk tape eraser (Radio shack has a good one for about $15) and then format the disk on whatever drive you want. This way there will be no residual data on the disk for a slightly misaligned head to pick up. I've used this method for a long time on other computers and have had no trouble at all.
phil@amdcad.UUCP (05/29/87)
In article <4008@amd.UUCP> markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: > >Does anyone ever bother to read reference manuals??? The following is a quote >from the IBM 3.2 DOS Reference Manual pages 1-9, 1-10. You must be new to this network. In this newsgroup people generally don't 1) believe in doing research before running to their terminals. Witness that stupid posting about the MACE utility. 2) believe in the scientific method. If something worked once that means it will always work, doesn't it? We launched 24 shuttles, the 25th should be just fine. 3) appear to know how to read manuals, or at least own any. I think I'll go away again. Things haven't gotten any better since the last time I unsubscribed. -- Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or amdcad!phil@decwrl.dec.com