Another disk imaging project
dave04a at dunfield.com
Wed Aug 3 11:56:12 CDT 2005
>> Yes. - What happens when the catweasel becomes unavailable?
>What happens when (disk controller of choice) become unavailable? :)
So ... just to make sure I understand you - you are suggesting that
a catweasle (how many have been made?) will be more obtainable than
a WD disk controller chip (LOTS made) ...?
>> A grave omission for something thats supposed to archive
>> non-PC-standard disks.
>If you're supposing the user can wire up a disk controller, why can't
>they wire up a simple 34(SA400) to 50(SA800) pin adapter cable? Also,
>you can buy an SA400/SA800 adaptor board that someone has made, which
>properly controls the TG43 line. Unfortunately, I can't remember the
>name of the board or who made it right now.
Missed point - if the device is intended to support non-PC disk formats,
then why not support 8" drives - it's not hard. Why should you have to
buy another board to performs the devices primary function.
Also note, that what I proposed would have the 8" interface on it, so
the case you mention does not occur - it's the guy who bought the cat
(and didn't build a controller) who has to wire up the adapter cable -
you have your argument backwards.
>> But would have tied the thing to one particular development
>> environment (Here's you VisualC++ library - have a nice day). The
>> best solution is a fully open and documented description of the
>> hardware and lots of sample code.
>There's no reason a bit of C wrapper code has to be tied to any
>particular 'development environment'.
Not the way it works in my experience (25+ years in embedded development
systems/tools) - invariably there will be unreleased source, or library
functions which make it tough to use elsewhere. I much prefer good docs
on the hardware to wading through reams of un/poorly docuemnted source
>I'd say that by ignoring (specifically) Apple ][ and C64, you're missing
>a large percentage of possible software/users.
another missed point ... anyone who's been following my work knows that I
have implemented a number of systems to cheaply archive, distribute and
restore disk images for various systems. This would have been just another
piece in the puzzle. Such systems already exist (and I use them) to archive
AppleII and C64 images.
>> Still deciding if it's worth it - I'll record your "NO" vote.
>Not to discourage you, but, I'd echo the sentiment above. I'd suggest
>that if you do want to produce something, make something that can read
>the disk on a flux-transition level, and store that sort of data.
>Something nice and generic. That way, you can do all the processing in
>software, and handle any format of disk that comes your way.
lots of other arguments snipped.
Ok - I don't need to get dumped on anymore. Consider the idea dropped...
dave04a (at) Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com Collector of vintage computing equipment:
More information about the cctech