If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
Mike S wrote:
On 11/12/2017 7:00 AM, Ed Mc wrote: On 11/1/2017 10:34 AM, Ed Mc wrote: If I purchase one of the 3.5 USB external floppy drives available, would I be able to access the files (FAT 32) on my old floppy's, using Windows 7? I do have an old XP hard disk somewhere. Not sure if it would recognize the USB ports though. Thanks I received the floppy drive, which I bought online, and gave it a try. Could see some files but could not activate them in any way. I could see Icons of photo's but not the pictures. Sometimes I got the 'disk not formatted' error msg., or 'Not Responding'. Used on Win7 OS and XP, same resuts.... Oh well, a $15 lesson learned. Ed Mc I've had old floppies seize up, or have trouble rotating, using a pen or something to insert into the offset hole near the center of the floppy so you can spin it a few times might work. You can also try snapping the housing open, freeing up the floppy, then closing it again, sometimes that works. If the floppy is already considered dead or unusable you have nothing to lose. You should open the 3.5" floppy shutter anyway, for a quick look. Just to see if there is obvious degradation. Another possibility, is the OP is mixing incompatible things. The Wikipedia article on floppies, shows a ton of options from other platforms. Just because it looks like a floppy... it might not be meant for your PC. I'm sure if I shoved one of my Mac software floppies into a PC, I'd see some "sad panda" symptoms for my effort :-) Some BIOS have some sort of "Japanese" setting for the floppy, but my failing memory doesn't recollect the right techie term for this. I think that setting may cause the floppy drive to fail. If you're going to be an "anthropologist" with computers, you're going to need a ton of research. And perhaps from an era where not a lot of breadcrumbs are left. Paul |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
On 11/12/2017 7:00 AM, Ed Mc wrote:
On 11/1/2017 10:34 AM, Ed Mc wrote: If I purchase one of the 3.5 USB external floppy drives available, would I be able to access the files (FAT 32) on my old floppy's, using Windows 7? I do have an old XP hard disk somewhere. Not sure if it would recognize the USB ports though. Thanks Â*Â*Â*Â*I received the floppy drive, which I bought online, and gave it a try. Could see some files but could not activate them in any way. I could see Icons of photo's but not the pictures. Sometimes I got the 'disk not formatted' error msg., or 'Not Responding'. Used on Win7 OS and XP, same resuts.... Oh well, a $15 lesson learned. -- Ed Mc When you said you could 'see some files' do you mean the were displayed in the File Explorer? What do you mean 'could not activate' them. What programs exactly, and do you know if they are 32 bit or 16 bit? Can you copy the images to the XP or w7 hdd and view them from there? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
On 11/1/17 11:34 AM, Ed Mc wrote:
If I purchase one of the 3.5 USB external floppy drives available, would I be able to access the files (FAT 32) on my old floppy's, using Windows 7? I do have an old XP hard disk somewhere. Not sure if it would recognize the USB ports though. Thanks Interesting experiences and comments. So, I'll add mine. A few months ago, I had a lady that needed some tutoring in using her Mac laptop. When we were done, as part of the conversation, she said she had some floppies from years ago that had some photos she would like to retrieve. But, no one was able to read them. I brought them home. Yep, I couldn't read them with any Windows computer I tried. And, on some, I had to use my USB external drive. No go. Kept getting a message that said the floppy could not be read. Tried at least one of my Macs, no go. I don't remember if I tried the Mac that actually has a built in floppy. I think I tried my Linux computer, but I don't remember. I have an Atari clone, tried that. It read every stinking file on all of the floppies! Burned those files to a CD, and she was a happy camper. Moral? Don't depend on mainstream systems to always work. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.11.6 Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit) Thunderbird 52.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
Ken Springer wrote:
On 11/1/17 11:34 AM, Ed Mc wrote: If I purchase one of the 3.5 USB external floppy drives available, would I be able to access the files (FAT 32) on my old floppy's, using Windows 7? I do have an old XP hard disk somewhere. Not sure if it would recognize the USB ports though. Thanks Interesting experiences and comments. So, I'll add mine. A few months ago, I had a lady that needed some tutoring in using her Mac laptop. When we were done, as part of the conversation, she said she had some floppies from years ago that had some photos she would like to retrieve. But, no one was able to read them. I brought them home. Yep, I couldn't read them with any Windows computer I tried. And, on some, I had to use my USB external drive. No go. Kept getting a message that said the floppy could not be read. Tried at least one of my Macs, no go. I don't remember if I tried the Mac that actually has a built in floppy. I think I tried my Linux computer, but I don't remember. I have an Atari clone, tried that. It read every stinking file on all of the floppies! Burned those files to a CD, and she was a happy camper. Moral? Don't depend on mainstream systems to always work. If you read the Wikipedia article on floppy, you'll find there are plenty of variants. Interworking is not a property of them. In some cases, it's actually media differences. The magnetic properties aren't the same (from the various eras). The same thing happened with optical drives and media. Original CD drives could not read CD-RW media, because nobody imagined the existence of such at the time. A different laser power was required. Laser diodes now, have a power control (for writing purposes), so the laser is kinda "fully programmable". The lasers on the first CDs were likely just too weak on output to stand a chance. The CD, DVD, and BD, use different wavelengths. And different optics too (not the same lens setup). But back in the CD era, the wavelength needed was probably the same, but the laser was just too weak. So in its own way, optical media is the same. They aren't all "optical discs" - each one is a pretty unique standard, and your drive is trying those standards one at a time (different laser, on a carousel), in an attempt to read the media tag. Like, a BD drive might have three lasers. With floppies, there were 360K, 720K, 1440K, and some Japanese standard which might have been a higher value (and perhaps a different drive). I have some motherboards, that they came out of the box, set for the Japanese standard, and needed to be set to something I owned. (That wasn't the LS-120 either, as the LS-120 is an IDE device and doesn't use the floppy controller chip.) You can be lulled into a false sense of security, by dipping into that same box of PC floppies for the last 15 years, and simply assuming they're all the same. I was a bit shocked reading the Wikipedia article, because I'd forgotten about some of those other platforms I'd never owned, which happened to use a different drive. Paul |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 21:31:03 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote: On 11/1/17 11:34 AM, Ed Mc wrote: If I purchase one of the 3.5 USB external floppy drives available, would I be able to access the files (FAT 32) on my old floppy's, using Windows 7? I do have an old XP hard disk somewhere. Not sure if it would recognize the USB ports though. Thanks Interesting experiences and comments. So, I'll add mine. A few months ago, I had a lady that needed some tutoring in using her Mac laptop. When we were done, as part of the conversation, she said she had some floppies from years ago that had some photos she would like to retrieve. But, no one was able to read them. I brought them home. Yep, I couldn't read them with any Windows computer I tried. And, on some, I had to use my USB external drive. No go. Kept getting a message that said the floppy could not be read. Tried at least one of my Macs, no go. I don't remember if I tried the Mac that actually has a built in floppy. I think I tried my Linux computer, but I don't remember. I have an Atari clone, tried that. It read every stinking file on all of the floppies! Burned those files to a CD, and she was a happy camper. Moral? Don't depend on mainstream systems to always work. The problem was almost certainly with a missing media descriptor byte. Read he https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/...ognized-by-win And ignore the terrible solution they propose there. The best solution is to format some diskettes on a modern Windows computer, then take those newly-formatted diskettes and the ones you want to read to an old computer running Windows 95 (if you can find one) then copy the diskettes to the newly-formatted diskettes there. Those copies will then be readable on a modern computer. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
In message , Paul
writes: [] If you read the Wikipedia article on floppy, you'll find there are plenty of variants. Interworking is not a property of them. In some cases, it's actually media differences. The magnetic properties I remember even seeing a hard-sectored 5.25" floppy. (Most such had one hole in the index track: it synched an oscillator when it passed the sensor in the index hole, and other sectors were when a certain time had passed. This one had multiple holes. aren't the same (from the various eras). The same thing happened I don't remember that, other than the difference between low-density (360K for 5.25", 720 for 3.5", for IBM PC use) and high (1.2M and 1.44M on IBM PCs). [The 3.5" floppies had an extra hole in the case, for the higher density IIRR; the 5.25" ones didn't.] For machines other than PCs (Amstrad, BBC, Commodore, ...), I think it was mostly a layout-of-sectors (and index [directory] structures) rather than actual magnetic variation, though I guess there might have been some such. with optical drives and media. Original CD drives could not read CD-RW media, because nobody imagined the existence of such at the time. A different laser power was required. Laser diodes now, have a power I don't think it was so much the _power_, as the _colour_; CD-Rs (and RWs) have a decided colour cast, whereas stamped CDs (mostly!) don't. (The writable ones probably _do_ need a bit more power to read them too - certainly if the laser colour isn't optimised for them.) There's also the format: you can write CD-RWs and CD-Rs in different formats from CDs. (Even if you used the right format, unless you wrote it all at once, the reading drive had to have "multisession" firmware, otherwise it would either only read the files written in the first session, or none at all.) [] With floppies, there were 360K, 720K, 1440K, and some Japanese standard which might have been a higher value (and perhaps a different drive). I have some motherboards, that they came out of the box, set for the Japanese standard, and needed to be set to something And Microsoft's own one that got _slightly_ more than 1.44 on a floppy (I don't _think_ it was "the Japanese one" [was that 2.88?]; it was only about 10% more, IIRR). I _think_ they used it just so that the number of floppies needed to hold Windows 95 - which could be bought on floppies - was reduced slightly. (The first at least floppy in the set was at standard 1.44, and included software to control the drive to get the bit more.) (Oh, it probably made copying more difficult, too, which they'd want.) [] some of those other platforms I'd never owned, which happened to use a different drive. My Oric Atmos - and one of the early Amstrad word-processors (a complete machine, not a piece of software) - used 3" drives, not 3.5". (A more solid structure, IMO - didn't catch on though.) Paul John -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "If just one child is saved, then we'll have created a police state for the benefit of just one child." |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
On 11/14/17 12:41 AM, Paul wrote:
Japanese standard which might have been a higher value (and perhaps a different drive) Might you be thinking of this? http://www.appuntidigitali.it/site/w...3-a-103741.jpg http://www.retroarchive.org/cpm/cdro...EWS/Z-NEWS.802 Excerpt below. Konica Technology, Inc., 777 North Pastoria Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086-2918, 408/773-9551, ships KT-510 10-megabyte floppy drive in volume. Downwardly compatible with ordinary 360Kb and 1.2Mb drives (Z-News 607-4), half-height 5.25" drive has embedded SCSI controller, 1.6 megabits per second data transfer rate, and 75 milliseconds average access time. Diskettes--480 tracks per inch, embedded servo written--produced and sold by Konica, for from $10 to $25 depending on quantity, are conventionally jacketed, not cased and shuttered as are Kodak 10Mb units (Z-News 801-4). Such diskette prices will certainly come down if they are ever produced in high volume. Such volume depends on a major computer manufacturer using them in their products. These high-capacity floppy drives, from either Kodak or Konica, especial- ly with the SCSI interface offer much easier and faster backup to RAM and hard disks than do tape drives. Random access, instead of sequential, to stored data make the difference. Make direct contact if you are interested in using one in your personal computer. If you want to translate some Italian... https://www.appuntidigitali.it/4855/...-14-per-10-mb/ I know they were available for Atari and Amiga systems, I don't know about any other systems. -- Ken Mac OS X 10.11.6 Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit) Thunderbird 52.0 "My brain is like lightning, a quick flash and it's gone!" |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
Ken Springer wrote:
On 11/14/17 12:41 AM, Paul wrote: Japanese standard which might have been a higher value (and perhaps a different drive) Might you be thinking of this? http://www.appuntidigitali.it/site/w...3-a-103741.jpg http://www.retroarchive.org/cpm/cdro...EWS/Z-NEWS.802 Excerpt below. Konica Technology, Inc., 777 North Pastoria Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086-2918, 408/773-9551, ships KT-510 10-megabyte floppy drive in volume. Downwardly compatible with ordinary 360Kb and 1.2Mb drives (Z-News 607-4), half-height 5.25" drive has embedded SCSI controller, 1.6 megabits per second data transfer rate, and 75 milliseconds average access time. Diskettes--480 tracks per inch, embedded servo written--produced and sold by Konica, for from $10 to $25 depending on quantity, are conventionally jacketed, not cased and shuttered as are Kodak 10Mb units (Z-News 801-4). Such diskette prices will certainly come down if they are ever produced in high volume. Such volume depends on a major computer manufacturer using them in their products. These high-capacity floppy drives, from either Kodak or Konica, especial- ly with the SCSI interface offer much easier and faster backup to RAM and hard disks than do tape drives. Random access, instead of sequential, to stored data make the difference. Make direct contact if you are interested in using one in your personal computer. If you want to translate some Italian... https://www.appuntidigitali.it/4855/...-14-per-10-mb/ I know they were available for Atari and Amiga systems, I don't know about any other systems. I never really understood what that setting was for, but it's mentioned in the last paragraph in this floppy article. The number 3 refers to modes, not density. Who knew? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy-disk_controller "3mode" floppy drive I thought it might have referred to a higher recording density mode (because of the way the BIOS was worded), but it just appears that some floppy drive supported three different densities. That must mean the floppy controller in the SuperI/O, was ready to deal with three different looking patterns coming in from the read head. ******* That Konica thing isn't the highest density achieved, as the LS-120 and LS-240 went higher than that. And appeared to be floppy-media based, but with optical marks for servo purposes (so a higher track pitch could be used). In North America, people would have been more likely to use ZIP drives. I have a ZIP250 here for example, for interworking with work media. Mine was USB based, but they made a flavor with parallel port interface as well. That would be competitive with an LS-240. The cartridges for the ZIP250 were pretty expensive. Paul |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:
In message , Paul writes: [] If you read the Wikipedia article on floppy, you'll find there are plenty of variants. Interworking is not a property of them. In some cases, it's actually media differences. The magnetic properties I remember even seeing a hard-sectored 5.25" floppy. (Most such had one hole in the index track: it synched an oscillator when it passed the sensor in the index hole, and other sectors were when a certain time had passed. This one had multiple holes. aren't the same (from the various eras). The same thing happened I don't remember that, other than the difference between low-density (360K for 5.25", 720 for 3.5", for IBM PC use) and high (1.2M and 1.44M on IBM PCs). [The 3.5" floppies had an extra hole in the case, for the higher density IIRR; the 5.25" ones didn't.] For machines other than PCs (Amstrad, BBC, Commodore, ...), I think it was mostly a layout-of-sectors (and index [directory] structures) rather than actual magnetic variation, though I guess there might have been some such. IIRC, 3.5" disks could do 2.88 MB but I think it used compression to do that? -- Quote of the Week: "I go out of my way to avoid stepping on ants." --Terry McGovern, daughter of Senator George and Eleanor McGovern, subject of the book "Terry by her father" Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site) / /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net | |o o| | \ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit- ( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link. |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
Ant wrote:
IIRC, 3.5" disks could do 2.88 MB but I think it used compression to do that? Apparently, they were just a doubling of density. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/fdd/formatKB2880-c.html And they were a flop commercially. Paul |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
That is correct Ant
-- AL'S COMPUTERS "Ant" wrote in message ... "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message , Paul writes: [] If you read the Wikipedia article on floppy, you'll find there are plenty of variants. Interworking is not a property of them. In some cases, it's actually media differences. The magnetic properties I remember even seeing a hard-sectored 5.25" floppy. (Most such had one hole in the index track: it synched an oscillator when it passed the sensor in the index hole, and other sectors were when a certain time had passed. This one had multiple holes. aren't the same (from the various eras). The same thing happened I don't remember that, other than the difference between low-density (360K for 5.25", 720 for 3.5", for IBM PC use) and high (1.2M and 1.44M on IBM PCs). [The 3.5" floppies had an extra hole in the case, for the higher density IIRR; the 5.25" ones didn't.] For machines other than PCs (Amstrad, BBC, Commodore, ...), I think it was mostly a layout-of-sectors (and index [directory] structures) rather than actual magnetic variation, though I guess there might have been some such. IIRC, 3.5" disks could do 2.88 MB but I think it used compression to do that? -- Quote of the Week: "I go out of my way to avoid stepping on ants." --Terry McGovern, daughter of Senator George and Eleanor McGovern, subject of the book "Terry by her father" Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site) / /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net | |o o| | \ _ / Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit- ( ) ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
The program was good IN IT'S DAY
not any more however -- AL'S COMPUTERS "Paul" wrote in message news Ant wrote: IIRC, 3.5" disks could do 2.88 MB but I think it used compression to do that? Apparently, they were just a doubling of density. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/fdd/formatKB2880-c.html And they were a flop commercially. Paul |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
In message , Andy
writes: The program was good IN IT'S DAY not any more however What program? (Also, if you must top-post, could you please _not_ use a proper sig-delimiter line?) -- AL'S COMPUTERS "Paul" wrote in message news Ant wrote: IIRC, 3.5" disks could do 2.88 MB but I think it used compression to do that? Apparently, they were just a doubling of density. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/fdd/formatKB2880-c.html And they were a flop commercially. Paul -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "This is a one line proof... if we start sufficiently far to the left." [Cambridge University Math Dept.] |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
3.5 floppy
On 11/15/2017 08:59 PM, Paul wrote:
Ant wrote: IIRC, 3.5" disks could do 2.88 MB but I think it used compression to do that? Apparently, they were just a doubling of density. http://www.pcguide.com/ref/fdd/formatKB2880-c.html And they were a flop commercially. Â*Â* Paul Also, disk compression claimed a doubling of capacity, but except in very unusual circumstances was more like 1.2 times than 2. -- 39 days until the winter celebration (Monday December 25, 2017 12:00:00 AM for 1 day). Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "Where there are humans you'll find flies, and Buddhas." --Issa |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|