Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pro-generic.cts.com!sb
From: sb@pro-generic.cts.com (Stephen Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: 5.25 floppy disk formats
Message-ID: <9356.infoapple.net@pro-generic>
Date: 15 Jan 90 08:26:35 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 14

In-Reply-To: message from rlw@ttardis.UUCP

Ron Wilson points out that Commodore used a similar storage format to Apple's,
but by using a different number of sectors on each track, managed to get more
data onto a disk.  My point which prompted this was a bit blurred.  I claimed
that 140K per side, or 280K per double-sided single-density disk was pretty
good in comparison to IBM's 360K DS DD disks.  Perhaps, I should have qualified
this a bit further: Apple's storage capacity is darn good, considering the
simplicity of the circuitry and the high data transfer rate.. something that the
Commodore 1541 fails miserably on both accounts.

UUCP: crash!pro-generic!sb
ARPA: crash!pro-generic!sb@nosc.mil
INET: sb@pro-generic.cts.com