hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) (11/16/90)
In <1990Nov16.035524.22022@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> ftw33616@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Frank T. Wang) writes: ->has anyoe used those programs that can format a 1.44 meg disk to, say, 1.7 meg? This I have not tried yet, but I think it is rather reliable. Amiga for instance formats a 1MEG disk to 880Kb, which is a lot more than IBM's 720. This is done by formatting more tracks/sector and more tracks/disk. This same method is used by the formatting program FDFORMAT16 (to be found at SIMTEL20, uwasa.fi, ...). There is however a minor disadvantage to formatting yer disks to a higher capacity -> they are not compatible anymore! So my advise is: don't use the program. There is a better way to gain diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! -> and other such HIGH formats? how unreliable are these? i figured it'd be ->as dangerous as formatting a DD disk HD. This is exactly what I just mentioned, and it is perfectly safe (I did this to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or such), because these are more reliable than others.) Hope this satisfies you and other netters as well, -- +------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+ | Hayo R. Baan | E-Mail : hrbaan@cs.ruu.nl | | Oudwijkerlaan 34 |-----------------------------------------------------| | 3581 TD UTRECHT | | | The Netherlands | A program is like a nose; | | | Sometimes it runs, sometimes it blows. | | Tel. 030-515586 | | +------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) (11/16/90)
In article <4319@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) writes: >There is a better way to gain >diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect >tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! >[...] >it is perfectly safe (I did this >to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at >all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or I have no doubt that this worked fine on your machine, but have you used those disks extensively on a machine other than the one they were formatted on? I find that this is where you usually run into trouble when formatting DD disks as HD. Has anyone else experienced this? Scott D. Coulter scott@cc.gatech.edu Georgia Tech Software Engineering Research Center
tcs@router.jhuapl.edu (11/16/90)
In article <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU>, scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) writes: >In article <4319@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) writes: >>There is a better way to gain >>diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect >>tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! >>[...] >>it is perfectly safe (I did this >>to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at >>all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or > >I have no doubt that this worked fine on your machine, but have you used >those disks extensively on a machine other than the one they were >formatted on? I find that this is where you usually run into trouble >when formatting DD disks as HD. Has anyone else experienced this? > >Scott D. Coulter >scott@cc.gatech.edu >Georgia Tech Software Engineering Research Center Actually there is a very good article in one of the current PC Magazine Tutor column (I think). You will want to read it, but to summarize, you shouldn't punch holes in the DD 3.5" disks because the disks are totally unreliable as HD disks. Something about the method of storage on the magnetic media not being the correct frequency (?). Read the article. It explains it completely. Carl Schelin tcs@router.jhuapl.edu
mig@cunixd.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green) (11/17/90)
In article <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@kong.UUCP (Scott Coulter) writes: >In article <4319@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) writes: >>There is a better way to gain >>diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect >>tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! >>[...] >>it is perfectly safe (I did this >>to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at >>all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or > >I have no doubt that this worked fine on your machine, but have you used >those disks extensively on a machine other than the one they were >formatted on? I find that this is where you usually run into trouble >when formatting DD disks as HD. Has anyone else experienced this? > >Scott D. Coulter >scott@cc.gatech.edu >Georgia Tech Software Engineering Research Center I, too have tried this trick. I have had one error to date and am no longer practicing the trick. If your information is massive and not too vital, this is a useful trick. But, don't come running to me when your .COM file crashes DOS! * * * * * * * ======================= Meir Green | * * * * * * * * ======================= mig@cunixd.cc.columbia.edu | * * * * * * * ======================= N2JPG |
elliot@xenna.encore.com (Elliot Mednick) (11/17/90)
In article <0093FCB0.70C886E0@router.jhuapl.edu>, tcs@router.jhuapl.edu writes: > In article <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU>, scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) writes: > >In article <4319@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) writes: > >>There is a better way to gain > >>diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect > >>tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! > >>[...] > >>it is perfectly safe (I did this > >>to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at > >>all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or > > > >I have no doubt that this worked fine on your machine, but have you used > >those disks extensively on a machine other than the one they were > >formatted on? I find that this is where you usually run into trouble > >when formatting DD disks as HD. Has anyone else experienced this? > > > >Scott D. Coulter > >scott@cc.gatech.edu > >Georgia Tech Software Engineering Research Center > > [...] The orginal poster asked about the higher density formatters, not about DD/HD disks. Did he? I used FDFORMAT for a year on an XT to format 360K floppies to 410K. I has NO problems with any of the disks. I DID find the I HAD to run FDREAD for it to work (this was rev. 14; I don't know why rev. 16 no longer requires it!). But this is no big deal; it's only 100 bytes. Later, I had a laptop with 2 720's and no hard disk. Again, I used FDFORMAT to format the 720's to 820 (or something like that) with no problems. Now that I have a real computer :=) I don't have as much need to up the 1.44 to 1.7. By the way, there is another shareware program called MAXI which I could not use because it tried to add 2 more tracks. FDFORMAT was much more versatile. I highly recommend it. __ Elliot Mednick (elliot@encore.com) | This .signature file is undergoing Encore Computer Corp. | remodeling for your convenience. Marlborough, MA. 01752 | Please pardon our appearance.
yiannis@ccad.uiowa.edu (Yiannis Papelis) (11/17/90)
In article <1990Nov16.184200.21028@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> mig@cunixd.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green) writes: >In article <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@kong.UUCP (Scott Coulter) writes: >>In article <4319@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) writes: >>>There is a better way to gain >>>diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect >>>tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! >>>[...] >> >>[no problem with it either lines ommited] > >I, too have tried this trick. >I have had one error to date and am no longer practicing the trick. >If your information is massive and not too vital, this is a useful trick. >But, don't come running to me when your .COM file crashes DOS! OK now, I don't want to be the stick in the mud, but from what I've read the practice of "pushing" disks one way (overformating them) or the other (using DD as HD) is not recommended. The most well documented and complete article I've seen on the subject was published on the November issue of PC Magazine, (V 9, #19) at page 549. The summury: you can 'push' a disk and it will probably work initially. But it is a matter of time until the magnetic print on the 'pushed' disk will wear out and the disk will fail. I strongly recommend reading the article before engaging in massive usage of disks formated for higher capacities that rated. I guess it comes down to how much the stuff you have on the disks is worth to you. Hope I've been helpfull. -- Yiannis E. Papelis -------- Electrical & Computer Engineering yiannis@eng.uiowa.edu -------- University of Iowa
stephen@corp.telecom.co.nz (Richard Stephen) (11/18/90)
In <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) writes: >>tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! >>[...] >>it is perfectly safe (I did this >>to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at >all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or > >I have no doubt that this worked fine on your machine, but have you used >those disks extensively on a machine other than the one they were >formatted on? I find that this is where you usually run into trouble >when formatting DD disks as HD. Has anyone else experienced this? To add my $0.02 worth, I have been doing exactly what hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) has been doing with the same success on something over 30 disks with no problems encountered using them (reading/writing) on other machines. Back in the February 1989 BYTE, page 30, there is an advert from an outfit called Biological Engineering Inc, Co. (In Co - (303) 872 8945 or 800-537-4226) that advertised a "Double Disk Converter". I sent for one of these gadgets ($29.95 + $3.50 s&h) to see what it was all about. I use it to punch the 2nd hole. The device is simply a pressesd metal plate with a spring loaded handle that pushes a hollow-ground steel tool the size of existing hole throught the case. Creates a neat hole with note ragged bits to drop into the case. It also does not load or distort the disc case. The advert says they checked out the media of both 720k and 1.44 MB discs and found no difference. They say they tested a 1000 discs and only one would not format and two had one bad track but none lost any data. I think the "no difference in the media" statement could be debated a while. In principle, I'm inclinded to agree if you view it from a disc manufacturer's point of view. It would be horribly expensive to run two production lines, but if you run one production and test *every* disc as it comes off the line with a special rigorous test for 1.44 MB media integrity, you have "guaranteed" 1.44 MB discs and the failures are, after quality checks your 720 K discs. Sound reasonable ? Connected with this thread, I have an interesting extra. I use a Sun 386i mostly at work. This has a 1.44 MB capable floppy that can be accessed by both SunOS and DOS. Under DOS - the drive recognises the modified discs and generally does not complain. I say generally, because I have had one disc that won't format, and one disc that wouldn't read one day, but was Ok the the next !. However, if you try to format a modified disc under SunOS - no way ! SunOS won't touch it. This I find really wierd. It is the same physical drive, but different software drivers. What is it that the DOS BIOS will accept that the SunOS /dev/rfd0 driver coughs on ? I guess I'm a satisfied customer. I've modified Verbatim and xidex discs. Moral - caveat emptor ! ============================ Richard Stephen =============================== | Technology Strategy | email: stephen@corp.telecom.co.nz | Telecom Corporation of NZ Ltd | voice: +64-4-823 180 | P O Box 570, Wellington | FAX: +64-4-801 5417 | New Zealand |
hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) (11/19/90)
In <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) writes: ->In article <4319@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> hrbaan@praxis.cs.ruu.nl (Hayo Baan) writes: ->>There is a better way to gain ->>diskspace : use DD disks, punch a hole in it (just opposite the write-protect ->>tab), and format it to HD. This way you gain 100% disk space for FREE!!! ->>[...] ->>it is perfectly safe (I did this ->>to about 60 disks, and they did not give one format/read/write/... error at ->>all!. The only recomendation I have is that you should use GOOD disks (3M or -> ->I have no doubt that this worked fine on your machine, but have you used ->those disks extensively on a machine other than the one they were ->formatted on? I find that this is where you usually run into trouble ->when formatting DD disks as HD. Has anyone else experienced this? Yes, I HAVE tested this on other computers as well (I own a TRIGEM-386VE, and I have tested it on both a LASER-286 and an OLIVETTI-286 machine). So I know it is safe (for 3M I am very sure, some KODAK disks gave me a hard time on the OLIVETTI, allthough I could still read and write them). Hope this informs you enough, -- +------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+ | Hayo R. Baan | E-Mail : hrbaan@cs.ruu.nl | | Oudwijkerlaan 34 |-----------------------------------------------------| | 3581 TD UTRECHT | | | The Netherlands | A program is like a nose; | | | Sometimes it runs, sometimes it blows. | | Tel. 030-515586 | | +------------------+-----------------------------------------------------+
kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) (11/19/90)
In article <1990Nov18.100239.10040@corp.telecom.co.nz> stephen@corp.telecom.co.nz (Richard Stephen) writes: >I think the "no difference in the media" statement could be debated a >while. In principle, I'm inclinded to agree if you view it from a disc >manufacturer's point of view. It would be horribly expensive to run two >production lines, but if you run one production and test *every* disc as >it comes off the line with a special rigorous test for 1.44 MB media >integrity, you have "guaranteed" 1.44 MB discs and the failures are, after >quality checks your 720 K discs. Sound reasonable ? Most manufacturers run a single line. Disks are tested for either high or low density; disks that fail high-density certification are usually tossed, rather than sent back for low-density certification (not cost-effective). Manufacturers that maintain good quality standards will have very few dropouts of either type, and usually not significantly more on the high side than on the low (when something's wrong in a newly manufactured disk, it probably isn't subtle). -- _ Kevin D. Quitt demott!kdq kdq@demott.com DeMott Electronics Co. 14707 Keswick St. Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 VOICE (818) 988-4975 FAX (818) 997-1190 MODEM (818) 997-4496 PEP last 96.37% of all statistics are made up.
walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) (11/21/90)
kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: >In article <1990Nov18.100239.10040@corp.telecom.co.nz> stephen@corp.telecom.co.nz (Richard Stephen) writes: >>I think the "no difference in the media" statement could be debated a >>while. In principle, I'm inclinded to agree if you view it from a disc >>manufacturer's point of view. It would be horribly expensive to run two >>production lines, but if you run one production and test *every* disc as >>it comes off the line with a special rigorous test for 1.44 MB media >>integrity, you have "guaranteed" 1.44 MB discs and the failures are, after >>quality checks your 720 K discs. Sound reasonable ? > Most manufacturers run a single line. Disks are tested for either >high or low density; disks that fail high-density certification are >usually tossed, rather than sent back for low-density certification (not >cost-effective). Manufacturers that maintain good quality standards >will have very few dropouts of either type, and usually not >significantly more on the high side than on the low (when something's >wrong in a newly manufactured disk, it probably isn't subtle). >-- > _ >Kevin D. Quitt demott!kdq kdq@demott.com >DeMott Electronics Co. 14707 Keswick St. Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 >VOICE (818) 988-4975 FAX (818) 997-1190 MODEM (818) 997-4496 PEP last > 96.37% of all statistics are made up. The only significant differences between th 720K and the 1.44MB disks are that the 720K disk have a coercitivity of about 600 compared to about 700 for 1.44MB disks, and the extra notch in the 1.44MB disks. (Coercitivity is a measurement of magnetic strength.) The difference in coercitivity is small, so that it can't be the problem, but that extra notch can definitely be a problem. Think about how much easier it is to make the entire disk, test it, and throw away bad ones than to stop the production line just before the extra notch is cut, test the disk, move the few medicore ones to the 720K disk line, and then cutting the notches in the rest of the disks. I believe it obvious why the 720K disks are make on a different line than the 1.44MB disks. Todd Walk walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Oh yes, I just about forgot to say that since the 720K disks have a lower coercitivity than the 1.44MB disks, they are marginally reliable formated as 1.44MB disks. This means that some will not format in 1.44MB, and the others will format as 1.44MB disks, but since disks lose coercitivity over time, they will lose their information MUCH faster than a true 1.44MB disk will. A true 1.44MB disk has a average data lifespan measured in years, while a 720K disk formated to 1.44MB have an average data lifespan measured in months.)
kdq@demott.COM (Kevin D. Quitt) (11/21/90)
In article <1990Nov20.201159.17450@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes: >Think about how much easier it is to make the entire disk, test it, >and throw away bad ones than to stop the production line just before the >extra notch is cut, test the disk, move the few medicore ones to the >720K disk line, and then cutting the notches in the rest of the disks. >I believe it obvious why the 720K disks are make on a different line than the >1.44MB disks. Yeah, except for one thing - the disks are tested long before being given a spindle or being put in a jacket - those very expensive steps take place *after* the disk has been certified. -- _ Kevin D. Quitt demott!kdq kdq@demott.com DeMott Electronics Co. 14707 Keswick St. Van Nuys, CA 91405-1266 VOICE (818) 988-4975 FAX (818) 997-1190 MODEM (818) 997-4496 PEP last 96.37% of all statistics are made up.
tcsc@tcsc3b2.tcsc.com (The Computer Solution Co.) (11/21/90)
stephen@corp.telecom.co.nz (Richard Stephen) writes: >In <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) writes: >Back in the February 1989 BYTE, page 30, there is an advert from an outfit >called Biological Engineering Inc, Co. (In Co - (303) 872 8945 or >800-537-4226) that advertised a "Double Disk Converter". I sent for one of >these gadgets ($29.95 + $3.50 s&h) to see what it was all about. I use it >to punch the 2nd hole. The device is simply a pressesd metal plate with a >spring loaded handle that pushes a hollow-ground steel tool the size of >existing hole throught the case. Creates a neat hole with note ragged bits >to drop into the case. It also does not load or distort the disc case. >The advert says they checked out the media of both 720k and 1.44 MB discs >and found no difference. They say they tested a 1000 discs and only one >would not format and two had one bad track but none lost any data. I have also purchased one of these devices. However, I may have had slightly more experience with it. I purchase the cheapest 3.5" disks available (usually from MEI in Columbus, OH) and do the hole punching. Over the past 2 years, we have processed nearly 1000 such disks. They are used in house on both MS-DOG and Unix systems. We also use them for distribution of software. So far, only one disk has failed to format. (After covering the extra hole, it wouldn't even format at low density). No disk read error has happened on any local or customer system. I checked my experience with the regional rep for one of the largest (US) suppliers of media. He checked with the factory (in St. Paul) and found that the difference is in the warranty, not in the media. They will replace any diskette which fails at the density for which it was purchased. Diskettes which have been modified will not be replaced. This amounts to the most expensive insurance I have ever seen. We usually pay about half a buck for 3.5" diskettes in bulk. I've seen the HD's for sale in similar quantities for more than twice that price. Based on my experience and that of a number of others, I believe that the disk manufacturers and distributors have perpetuated a myth to their own substantial financial benefit. _______________________________________________________________________________ David P. Romig INTERNET: tcsc@tcsc3b2.tcsc.com The Computer Solution Co. USENET: ...!tcsc3b2!tcsc P.O. Box 716 ATTMAIL: attmail!tcsc3b2!tcsc 831 Grove Road CompuServe: 74116,2345 Midlothian, VA 23113-0716 UUCP: tcsc3b2!tcsc (804)794-1514 Voice: 804-794-3491 x31 Fax: (804)794-6194 _______________________________________________________________________________
hthomas@irisa.fr (Henry Thomas) (11/22/90)
From article <1990Nov21.023456.28006@tcsc3b2.tcsc.com>, by tcsc@tcsc3b2.tcsc.com (The Computer Solution Co.): > stephen@corp.telecom.co.nz (Richard Stephen) writes: > >>In <17184@hydra.gatech.EDU> scott@kong.gatech.edu (Scott Coulter) writes: > >>Back in the February 1989 BYTE, page 30, there is an advert from an outfit > > I checked my experience with the regional rep for one of the largest > (US) suppliers of media. He checked with the factory (in St. Paul) and > found that the difference is in the warranty, not in the media. They > will replace any diskette which fails at the density for which it was > purchased. Diskettes which have been modified will not be replaced. > The explanation is know is very similar. All 3"5 diskrette are produced the same way. Now suppose thwey produced 10000 no differenciatred diskettes. They want now to release 4000 1.44 disk. They sample the disks and check them until they have 4000 disks (of course, the disks are statistically sampled). The remaining disks are then sold as 720 K disks, because they have not been CHECKED, though they MAY be good a 1.44M. Henry. -- -- Henry Thomas