slackey@bbn.com (Stan Lackey) (11/04/88)
I'm so confused. In article <4578@bsu-cs.UUCP> cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) writes: >... As any >other XF551 owner knows - all the stuff on the 1050 is not compatible if you >notched and wrote on the back of your disk. (The XF551 writes on the back >of the disk BACKWARDS - leave it to Atari to make unnecessary improvements.) I have seen references to this several times now. Why does anybody care what the back of a 1050 disk looks like? Is there a way on the 551 to access the back of a 1050-formatted disk without turning it over? Under Atari DOS? Please explain using no more than 2-syllable words. -Stan
cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) (11/05/88)
In article <31836@bbn.COM>, slackey@bbn.com (Stan Lackey) writes: > > > ... (The XF551 writes on the back of the disk BACKWARDS - leave it to > > Atari to make unnecessary improvements.) > > I have seen references to this several times now. Why does anybody care > what the back of a 1050 disk looks like? Is there a way on the 551 to > access the back of a 1050-formatted disk without turning it over? Under > Atari DOS? > Please explain using no more than 2-syllable words. > -Stan OK, let's see if I can relay this through my experience. I bought the XF551. It seemed like there was nothing major different about it. On the 1050, when I filled disks, I formatted the front, notched a hole on the left side, formatted the back, and then filled both sides of the disk with whatever. Well, when I tried this with the XF551, it wouldn't work. It formatted the front fine, everything seemed the same. But, when I notched the left side, turned the disk over, and tried to format the back, it crashed. I'm not sure how it all works, but when reading the ad for the XF551 Enhancer, it said that the XF551 writes to the back of the disk BACKWARDS! So, apparently while we don't really care what a 1050 formatted disk looks like, it does. I just know that before I bought this chip I couldn't do everything I used to be able to do with the 1050. Now that I have it, 98% of everything is back to normal (I'd say it was a well-spent $30). \ Mike Wildridge - Nude Model Extraordinaire / DJ Wannabe \ \ Menk Hall Box 102 ____ \ POWER ON! \ Muncie, IN 47306-1082 \ / "This is Power, \ / \ (317) 285-6777 \/ Captain Jonathan Power!" \/ / UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!cptpower /
BobR@cup.portal.com (Bob BobR Retelle) (11/05/88)
Stan Lackey asks: >I'm so confused. >In article <4578@bsu-cs.UUCP> cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) writes: >>... As any >>other XF551 owner knows - all the stuff on the 1050 is not compatible if you >>notched and wrote on the back of your disk. (The XF551 writes on the back >>of the disk BACKWARDS - leave it to Atari to make unnecessary improvements.) >I have seen references to this several times now. Why does anybody care what >the back of a 1050 disk looks like? Is there a way on the 551 to access the >back of a 1050-formatted disk without turning it over? Under Atari DOS? >Please explain using no more than 2-syllable words. >-Stan Sigh... I'm afraid I'd use up the entire Net bandwidth trying to explain this... I'll try to hit the "high" points, but for more "in-depth" info about the *supposed* XF-551 incompatibilities, watch for an article by Matt Ratcliff in an upcoming issue of (I think) ANALOG magazine. First of all... THERE IS NO COMPATIBILITY PROBLEM..! This is all a "semantics" problem, a massive misunderstanding of the way disk drives work... The XF-551 is a *standard* Double Sided disk drive. It has a read/write head on BOTH sides of the disk, so it can write to both sides. A "single sided" drive, like the 1050 has a head on only ONE side, and it IS NOT supposed to write to the other side..! Atari owners have found ways to get around this by manually turning the disk over, and using the other side as if it was a *second* SINGLE SIDED disk... BUT... these "Flippy disks" ARE NOT "true" Double Sided disks. Actually, it is the *1050* which "writes backwards" on the back side of a disk, because it is writing the back as if it was the "front" of another disk. When you put a "flippy" in an XF-551, the back side has been written in a *non-standard* way, and thus cannot be read, UNLESS you manually turn it over, just like on a 1050... in that case, it will read just fine..! It's awfully hard to explain without some kind of illustrations to go along with the text... but the bottom line is, there is NOTHING wrong with the XF-551, it just can't read the back side of the NON-STANDARD "Flippy" disks without turning them over manually. If you've been "flipping" your disks, you'll still have to flip them in an XF-551. Any disks you write as "true" Double Sided disks with an XF-551 will not be able to be read by "flipping" them in a 1050... these are not "bugs", it's just the way it works..! BobR (Can you believe it..? I'm actually defending Atari! :)
c91a-ra@franny.Berkeley.EDU (john kawakami reader) (11/05/88)
I thought the 551 is a double sided drive. I don't have one, so I don't know.
RE: writing the flip side backwards.
Does that chip let you turn the disk over to read side B or does it let you
read side B without flipping the disk? Can the chip be disabled?
John
John Kawakami / c91a-ra@franny.berkeley.edu / I'm sorryyyy, I'm sorryyyy,
/ / I'm sorryyyy, I'm sorryyyy.
/ / -S. Central Rain (REM)cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) (11/06/88)
In article <7108@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, c91a-ra@franny.Berkeley.EDU (john kawakami reader) writes: > I thought the 551 is a double sided drive. I don't have one, so I don't > know. > > RE: writing the flip side backwards. > Does that chip let you turn the disk over to read side B or does it let you > read side B without flipping the disk? Can the chip be disabled? Well, the 551 IS a double sided drive. But, just as Atari did when they made the new XL series (way back when) they made some improvements on those that made some stuff not compatible from the old 400/800 series. When I inserted a disk and formatted it in the usual way, I saw no difference in disk space. So, I naturally just turned the disk over (like with the old 1050) and tried to format it. It wouldn't even format. I went through all kinds of routines and frustrations and just got down-right ticked. Then I found out that they made some wierd changes. I bought this chip and installed it and now it's all gret. Yes, the chip can be disabled. There is a switch attached to it that you stick out the back of your 551. One way makes it like the 1050 and the other way makes it stay like it was made. I can vouch for this addition and still think it's a necessity for any XF551 owner. \ Mike Wildridge - Nude Model Extraordinaire / DJ Wannabe \ \ Menk Hall Box 102 ____ \ POWER ON! \ Muncie, IN 47306-1082 \ / "This is Power, \ / \ (317) 285-6777 \/ Captain Jonathan Power!" \/ / UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!cptpower /
ken@hpclkms.HP.COM (Kenneth Sumrall) (11/08/88)
/ hpclkms:comp.sys.atari.8bit / cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) / 5:09 pm Nov 5, 1988 / > >Well, the 551 IS a double sided drive. But, just as Atari did when they >made the new XL series (way back when) they made some improvements on those >that made some stuff not compatible from the old 400/800 series. When >I inserted a disk and formatted it in the usual way, I saw no difference >in disk space. So, I naturally just turned the disk over (like with the >old 1050) and tried to format it. It wouldn't even format. I went >through all kinds of routines and frustrations and just got down-right >ticked. I've been told that the XF551 uses the same drive mechanism as the MS-DOS world does. These drives use the index hole in the disk when they format the disk. Therefore, it is not possible to flip a disk over and format the backside since the index hole isn't lined up with the sensor. This is really no a problem however, since Spartados and others will let you format the disk as true double sided, double density and give you 360K on one disk. A much better alternative to flippy disks. Also, I think the FSII incompatibility with the XF551 is not related to this problem. It has to do with the copy protection scheme that FSII uses. (Terry, am I right? Enquiring minds want to know :-) That's what happens when software is copy protected. Ken Sumrall +-----------------------------+ ken%hpclkms@hplabs.hp.com |Your Kung-Fu is no good here!| ...!hplabs!hpclkms!ken +-----------------------------+
slackey@bbn.com (Stan Lackey) (11/08/88)
In article <4620@bsu-cs.UUCP> cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) writes: >In article <7108@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, c91a-ra@franny.Berkeley.EDU > (john kawakami reader) writes: >> RE: writing the flip side backwards. >> Does that chip let you turn the disk over to read side B or does it let you >> read side B without flipping the disk? Can the chip be disabled? >... So, I naturally just turned the disk over (like with the >old 1050) and tried to format it. It wouldn't even format. ... It seems that the 551 can read and write the back of a disk, but cannot FORMAT it. I have done this. OK, here's my theory, which is mine and mine alone: I have read that the 551 uses the little hole near the center of the disk. Perhaps it uses it, even in 1050 mode, when formatting. Note that when a disk is backwards, the access holes in the sleeve are in a different place. My theory continues: The respectable? company that sells the tweek changes the formatting procedure to use soft formatting instead of hard. They tell you that the drive turns backward; if they told you that a paper punch would solve the problem, they wouldn't sell very many widgets, would they!? I AM GOING TO TRY THIS TONIGHT!! And I bet half the Atari net as well... Stay tuned! -Stan
njd@ihlpm.ATT.COM (DiMasi) (11/11/88)
> > / hpclkms:comp.sys.atari.8bit / cptpower@bsu-cs.UUCP (Mike Wildridge) / 5:09 pm Nov 5, 1988 / >> >>Well, the 551 IS a double sided drive. But, just as Atari did when they >> .... >>ticked. > > I've been told that the XF551 uses the same drive mechanism as the MS-DOS world > does. These drives use the index hole in the disk when they format the disk. So do the Percom drives for Atari. I know that I'm not the only user of those drives (why not? mine still work fine after 4 or 5 years, and they are decent single-sided, single/double density drives.). In fact, as I recall Percom (and possibly others) were the first to _market_ double-density drives for the Atari 8-bit computers. (Atari developed _but never marketed_ their double- density drive. It was a dual drive, too. I wonder if it was any good?) Other makes of 8-bit drives may or may not use the index hole when formatting; does anyone know about Indus, Trak, Rana, Astra, ? > Therefore, it is not possible to flip a disk over and format the backside > since the index hole isn't lined up with the sensor. > This is what I've been told by Bob Retelle (who posted an excellent article here about the '551), who has tried with Percoms, too. I would have to get creative with a paper punch (or dig up one of those Nibble Notch II gadgets, that punches a write-notch and index hole for the 2nd side). I also found out (my ignorance is showing on this one) that disks labelled "single sided" will usually work this way, i.e. they are really double sided. Perhaps they are just not "certified" to work on the 2nd side. (I usually find "single sided" disks are cheaper, but then again I don't shop _everywhere_ for them.) > This is really no a problem however, since Spartados and others will let you > format the disk as true double sided, double density and give you 360K on > one disk. A much better alternative to flippy disks. Yes, and you can still read and even write flippy disks by turning them over as in any other 8-bit drive. (You just can't format them, without punching a 2nd index hole, maybe a disadvantage to an 8-bit club librarian but not most of us, since you can format it "true" double-sided.) > > Also, I think the FSII incompatibility with the XF551 is not related to this > problem. It has to do with the copy protection scheme that FSII uses. (Terry, > am I right? Enquiring minds want to know :-) That's what happens when > software is copy protected. > The 8-bit gurus on DELPHI (and I believe I saw this here too) said that the problem with FSII indeed stems from the protection scheme: sensitivity to disk speed is at least part of it. The '551 reportedly runs at about 300 rpm, instead of the usual 288 or so for other 8-bit drives. Does anyone have a _definitive_ answer to the question, "will Sublogic [ever] support the '551?" As far as other copy protection, ask me sometime what happened when I tried to boot the first copy of Synfile+ my wife and I bought (for use with the Illinois chapter of her professional association). That is, if you really want to know :-) > Ken Sumrall +-----------------------------+ > ken%hpclkms@hplabs.hp.com |Your Kung-Fu is no good here!| > ...!hplabs!hpclkms!ken +-----------------------------+ Nick DiMasi njd@ihlpm.ATT.COM ...att!ihlpm!njd DELPHI: TURBONICK Uni'q Digital Technologies (Fox Valley Software subsidiary; ^ working as a contractor at AT&T Bell Labs in Naperville, IL) ( | this is an accent mark, supposed to replace the dot over the 'i')
jac423@leah.Albany.Edu (Julius A Cisek) (11/11/88)
I too have a percom drive, but alas mine is also capable of formatting double sided disks. I have had it for about 5 years and have not had any problems with it. On a similiar note, does anyone know if it is possible to program the percom drive to handle enhanced format? If it can handle ss/sd, ss/ds, ds/sd, ds/dd, then why not the enhanced density used by the 1050? From what I understand the percom has a programable drive controler. Jules... -- What about technology, computers, .------------------. J.A.Cisek nuclear fusion? I'm terrified of |Spectral Fantasies| jac423@leah.albany.edu radiation, I hate the television. `------------------' jac423@rachel.albany.edu
kimes@ihlpe.ATT.COM (Kit Kimes) (11/12/88)
>> >> I've been told that the XF551 uses the same drive mechanism as the MS-DOS world >> does. These drives use the index hole in the disk when they format the disk. > > So do the Percom drives for Atari. I know that I'm not the only user > of those drives (why not? mine still work fine after 4 or 5 years, and > they are decent single-sided, single/double density drives.). I also have a Percom drive (the first SS/SD -AT88?) but it doesn't use the index hole while formatting. I can notch the disk, put it in backwards and format it fine. Guess that was before they worried about how to handle DS disk drives. > >> Therefore, it is not possible to flip a disk over and format the backside >> since the index hole isn't lined up with the sensor. >> Can you still buy soft sectored disks with two index holes? If so that should solve your problem provided they aren't too expensive. > Kit Kimes AT&T--Bell Laboratories ...att!ihlpe!kimes
BobR@cup.portal.com (Bob BobR Retelle) (11/12/88)
Nick DiMasi writes, regarding formatting the "back" side of a disk by "flipping" it manually in an XF-551 drive: >I would have to get creative with a paper punch (or dig up one of >those Nibble Notch II gadgets, that punches a write-notch and >index hole for the 2nd side). Exactly right..! When I was helping a friend who owned a Percom drive, I eventually made up a small cardboard "jig" to help me mark the spot opposite the existing timing hole, so I could then *very carefully* insert the business end of a paper punch into the central hub hold of the disk jacket and punch the new timing hole (through both the top and bottom of the disk jacket... ONE SIDE AT A TIME...! You DON'T want to punch through the disk itself..!!) I finally ended up just taking his disks home and formatting them on my Atari 810 drive for him... There used to be special "Flippy" disks available, with timing holes pre-punched on both sides... these would be ideal for anyone who seems to feel they still must "flip" their disks in an XF-551... they may be hard to find now though... BobR
dlm@druhi.ATT.COM (Dan Moore) (11/15/88)
in article <1243@leah.Albany.Edu>, jac423@leah.Albany.Edu (Julius A Cisek) says: > On a similiar note, does anyone know if it is > possible to program the percom drive to handle enhanced format? If it > can handle ss/sd, ss/ds, ds/sd, ds/dd, then why not the enhanced density > used by the 1050? From what I understand the percom has a programable > drive controler. The Percom controller will work with any disk format with sector sizes less than 256 bytes. Enhanced format will work, you just have to reprogram the controller. PERCOM drives have 2 or 3 special SIO commands that allow you to set the number of sectors per track, the sector size and the encoding method (FM or MFM). The drives support "any" number of sectors per track, limited only by how fast the drive is spinning and sector sizes up to 1024 bytes, though only the first 256 bytes are actually readable. I don't have an 8 bit or my doc's on 8 bit hardware anymore or I'd post the commands that were used by PERCOM. Dan Moore AT&T Bell Labs Denver dlm@druhi.ATT.COM
hans@umd5.umd.edu (Hans Breitenlohner) (11/24/88)
In article <2567@ihlpm.ATT.COM> njd@ihlpm.ATT.COM (DiMasi) writes: >> >> Also, I think the FSII incompatibility with the XF551 is not related to this >> problem. It has to do with the copy protection scheme that FSII uses. (Terry, >> am I right? Enquiring minds want to know :-) That's what happens when >> software is copy protected. >> > >The 8-bit gurus on DELPHI (and I believe I saw this here too) said that the >problem with FSII indeed stems from the protection scheme: sensitivity to >disk speed is at least part of it. The '551 reportedly runs at about 300 rpm, >instead of the usual 288 or so for other 8-bit drives. Does anyone have a >_definitive_ answer to the question, "will Sublogic [ever] support the '551?" > This is indeed one of the aspects of copy protection which give it a bad name. Since Sublogic seems unresponsive, I would pursue one of the following three approaches, if I encountered this problem: 1. Adjust the drive speed to 288 rpm permanently, and hope that everything else keeps on working. 2. if (1) does not work out, install some "enhancement" to the drive's speed-regulating circuitry, so that the speed can be switched between 288 and 300 rpm. 3. Work on a software solution (i.e. crack the copy protection). I am well aware that both (2) and (3) require a substantial investment of time. I am also quite appalled that any copy protection scheme should fail over a 4% increase in drive speed.