Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr!tektronix!psueea!parsely!bucket!leonard
From: leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: 1.2meg/360k compatibility question
Message-ID: <1553@bucket.UUCP>
Date: 12 Jul 89 07:12:15 GMT
References: <IYiAOwy00UhBI1IEMx@andrew.cmu.edu>
Organization: Rick's Home-Grown UNIX; Portland, OR.
Lines: 26

as2d+@andrew.cmu.edu (Alan Henry Stein) writes:

<I am currently putting together a new computer and have a question.  I have
<read all the warning (in the DOS manual etc.) about writing to a 360k disk
<in a 1.2 meg drive (disk formatted at 360k) and then not being able to read
<it in true 360k drives.  I have also read about similar compatibility problems
<between 1.44meg and 720k drives.  Anyone have a problem with this type of
<compatibility or come up with a solution to it (other than putting in both
<HD and DD drives)??

I've run into the problem with 360/1.2 compatability. It can be (sort of)
avoided by only using new or bulk-erased floppies and formatting them
in the 1.2 drive. The problem is because the tracks written by the
1.2 drive are less than 1/2 as wide as the tracks written by a 360k
drive. So the 360 drive could read both old and new data at the same
time if the disk has been *written* in a 360k drive before being written
to in the 1.2 drive.

I've never heard anything but rumor about 720k/1.44 problems. I have
heard very strong statements to the effect that there are *not*
any problems. This makes sense as both are 80 track formats.
-- 
Leonard Erickson		...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools.
Let's start with typewriters." -- Solomon Short