[Coco] Sierra Xmas 86 demo

[Stephen H. Fischer]

Hi,

I thought about a NitrOS-9 version for emulators that would accept both 
DNS=1 and DNS=3 for 2880 sector disks.

1. No one will want to support two versions.

2. The change will never appear in the nightly builds because they are not 
being built.

3. If they are built no one will use them. What's a nightly build, is it 
good to eat?

4. Of the people in the CoCo world, 1.5 are in sync.

5. There is no way to get everybody in sync.

6. Where are the Original OS-9 disks was asked so often that I created a 
thread. Eight Hundred Ninety Six views (896)

7. I got only one vote when I ran for dictator. Fine except no one else got 
any votes. I really wanted someone to run and accept being dictator.

8. When is the next release of NitrOS-9 to occur? When will a new NitrOS-9 
file for VCC to be released.

9. If this list is read backwards will it make it on Letterman?

10. I plan to die one day after Dave Lettermans last show.

11. Dave has said he will do one more show than Leno

Time for the Scottish comic to come on with his horse and robot.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Pierce" <ooogalapasooo@ aol.com>
To: <coco at maltedmedia.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2012 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Coco] Sierra Xmas 86 demo


>
> The bad thing is that neither drivewire nor the emulators care one bit 
> about the dns but it's set in the descriptors and drivers and the disks 
> will error. If there was a way in the driver to reconize that it was an 
> image and not a disk and to just ignor the dns, the problem would go away. 
> Very few people are using real drives as more & more are failing.
>
> Bill P
>
> Music from the Tandy/Radio Shack Color Computer 2 & 3
> https://sites.google.com/site/dabarnstudio/
> Bill Pierce
> ooogalapasooo at aol.com
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Theodore (Alex) Evans <alxevans at concentric.net>
> To: coco <coco at maltedmedia.com>
> Sent: Mon, Dec 10, 2012 2:24 am
> Subject: Re: [Coco] Sierra Xmas 86 demo
>
>
> On 12-12-09 11:39 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>
>> On Monday 10 December 2012 00:38:14 Theodore (Alex) Evans did opine:
>
>>> The reason why is so that if you put 40trk media in a 80trk drive it
>>> will read it properly.  While this is largely immaterial on 3.5" drives
>>> (I actually do own a 40trk 3.5" drive so they do exist) going with dns=3
>>> on 3.5" drives allows the same image and descriptor for 3.5" and 5.25"
>>> 720k disks.
>
>> You could get away with that UNTIL you go to read somebody elses properly
>> formatted 3.5" disk and can't.
>
> This is well covered ground on this list.  There are *logical* reasons
> for choosing both DNS=1 and DNS=3 for an 80 track 3.5" floppy under
> OS-9.  Unfortunately, as a direct result, 720k images (mostly for 3.5"
> disks) exist using both conventions.  It sucks.  The situation has been
> there since people started using 3.5" floppy drives with their CoCos and
> it isn't likely to go away.  Since 3.5" floppies are neither 48tpi, nor
> are they 96tpi, neither side is wrong, and to claim that they are is
> only being a source of friction in the community.
>
>
> -- 
> Theodore (Alex) Evans
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco