Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!sasg0244
From: sasg0244@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Single sided diskettes
Message-ID: <111700109@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 22 Jun 89 01:41:00 GMT
References: <2214@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu>
Lines: 24
Nf-ID: #R:bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu:2214:uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:111700109:000:1156
Nf-From: uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!sasg0244    Jun 21 20:41:00 1989


/* Written  6:31 pm  Jun 19, 1989 by tcm@srhqla.UUCP in uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.sys.ibm.pc */
>In article <2214@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> vu0112@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu
(Cliff Joslyn) writes:
>>
>>Is it kosher to use 5.25" SS/DD disks formatted at 360K . . .

>It depends on how important your data is to you.  No one starts out intending
>to manufacture SS disks.  What happens is that after a disk is manufactured,
>a surface defect test is run on it.  If both sides fail to pass, the disk is
>rejected.  If one side passes, the disk is marked SS.  If both sides pass,
>the disk is marked DS.  When you use the back side of a SS floppy, you
>are using media that the manufacturer doesn't think is good enough to
>sell.

Well, this may have changed since I last looked into it, but as of a
couple of years ago the only difference between SS and DS disks was
that the manufacturers actually tested the second side of the DS
disks. They had no idea if there were any defects on the second side
of the SS disks. I've always bought SS disks and used them as DS disks
and I've never had a problem. But hell, I could be wrong.

Steve Sivier
Future dead man