• Re: Floppies - Actual Question

    From Nuno Silva@nunojsilva@invalid.invalid to comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers on Sun Sep 28 11:19:37 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On 2025-09-28, Rich wrote:

    c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
    On 9/27/25 11:21, St|-phane CARPENTIER wrote:
    Le 24-09-2025, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> a |-crit-a:
    On Wed, 24 Sep 2025 05:06:00 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

    BUT - no partition table on the disk

    I haven't tried to access MS-DOS floppies from a *n*x
    system for a long time.

    Also, floppies donrCOt do partitions.

    Two things. First I never heard bout that. But most importantly, I
    never considered that possibility as long as I used floppies. I was
    always wondering how I could use as few floppies as possible to put
    my files. I was always on the way to partition my files to manage
    to put hem on floppies. Never on the way to partition floppies.

    At the time I used floppies, if anyone asked me how to partition
    them I would have wondered. Why on earth would someone want to do
    that? There are many floppies, they can't store anything relatively
    big and they take ages to format. To take time to partition them
    and to format each partition just to have less space available is a
    wonder to me. If you want a technical chalenge, why not, but in
    real life: what for?

    Well, partitions can be used for "organization"
    purposes, which can be useful.

    Partitions were only loosely for 'organization' in the MS-DOS days.
    Their primary purpose was to work around MS-DOS and early windows
    (which was a shell above MS-DOS) disk size limits. Hard drives grew in
    size faster than MS-DOS was updated to handle the larger sizes.

    Just MS-DOS limitations? Or from the firmware (as in "PC BIOS") too?

    Remember too that floppies held rather a LOT of data - by the needs
    and standards of the time.

    While you can partition them, I very much doubt doing so in the MS-DOS
    days would have worked. DOS would have been very unlikely to have
    assigned drive letters to floppy partitions. More likely, it would
    have either refused to access the floppy, or just merrilly overwrote
    the floppy as if it were never partitioned.

    --
    Nuno Silva
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers on Sun Sep 28 15:22:40 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On 28/09/2025 11:19, Nuno Silva wrote:
    Partitions were only loosely for 'organization' in the MS-DOS days.
    Their primary purpose was to work around MS-DOS and early windows
    (which was a shell above MS-DOS) disk size limits. Hard drives grew in
    size faster than MS-DOS was updated to handle the larger sizes.
    Just MS-DOS limitations? Or from the firmware (as in "PC BIOS") too?

    Either, I implemented a BIOS upgrade that could use 2k sized sectors
    instead of 512k , and increased hard drive capacity to IIRC 128Mbyte.

    MSDOS at that time could not IIRC cope with more than 64k sectors.

    TBH it is so long ago that I have forgotten almost all detail of that contract, except that I used to walk to work past some amazing purple
    opium poppies, whose seeds I collected and whose offspring I have to
    this day...
    --
    Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Charlie Gibbs@cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid to comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers on Sun Sep 28 18:07:27 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On 2025-09-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 28/09/2025 11:19, Nuno Silva wrote:

    Just MS-DOS limitations? Or from the firmware (as in "PC BIOS") too?

    Either, I implemented a BIOS upgrade that could use 2k sized sectors instead of 512k , and increased hard drive capacity to IIRC 128Mbyte.

    Silly rabbit. 32 megabytes ought to be enough for anybody.
    --
    /~\ Charlie Gibbs | Growth for the sake of
    \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | growth is the ideology
    X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | of the cancer cell.
    / \ if you read it the right way. | -- Edward Abbey
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Lawrence =?iso-8859-13?q?D=FFOliveiro?=@ldo@nz.invalid to comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers on Sun Sep 28 19:18:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 18:07:27 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

    Silly rabbit. 32 megabytes ought to be enough for anybody.

    26 drive letters are certainly still enough!! ArenrCOt they??
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers on Sun Sep 28 23:55:26 2025
    From Newsgroup: alt.folklore.computers

    On 28/09/2025 19:07, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
    On 2025-09-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

    On 28/09/2025 11:19, Nuno Silva wrote:

    Just MS-DOS limitations? Or from the firmware (as in "PC BIOS") too?

    Either, I implemented a BIOS upgrade that could use 2k sized sectors
    instead of 512k , and increased hard drive capacity to IIRC 128Mbyte.

    Silly rabbit. 32 megabytes ought to be enough for anybody.

    Not my decisons., The customer wanted to fit an 80Mbyte drive and they
    paid me well enough...
    --
    Any fool can believe in principles - and most of them do!



    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2