Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!humu!uhccux!richard
From: richard@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Richard Foulk)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: 3 1/2" on the 7300
Message-ID: <1944@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Date: 13 Jun 88 12:37:54 GMT
References: <213@toylnd.UUCP> <2422@ukecc.engr.uky.edu> <384@icus.UUCP>
Reply-To: richard@uhccux.UUCP (Richard Foulk)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 22

}If he doubled the amount of cylinders as in says in his article (see above
}quoted section) that means you will get double the space... about 720K.
}
}-Lenny
}
}BTW: You have to realize that 3.5" disks cost about twice as much as 5.25"
}     ones... so you'll get twice the space at twice the costs... One wonders
}     how much savings that is.. (Other than you sanity for inserting and
}     removing disks) 

Reducing the pain of backing the system up is what it's all about.
I'm still waiting for an affordable tape system.  But a simple
doubling of diskette capacity is real tempting.

Also, I think 3.5" disks have been found to be more reliable.

Some time back someone posted an article about having installed a
3.5" drive on their unixpc and explained all about, including the
configuration files.  Perhaps someone could pull it out of the
archives and repost it.

Richard