15 Correction/clarification on Apple external floppy drives and Eject buttons 10 Write Protect tab does not protect from damage 4 Confusion over physical sizes and variants Computing Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing Template:WikiProject Computing Computing articlesThis article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.Per Wikipedia:Summary style, most of its detailed content must be moved into the (already existing) "main" articles:Main articles: Floppy disk format and List of floppy disk formatsWhile the section "Formats" here must give a summary/overview without digging deep detail. 36 "Disk Hacker" listed at Redirects for discussion"Formats" section must be dismantled This technical section dominates the article. 30 Suggested addition to speed and or performance section: X10 accelerated floppy drive 21 5¼-inch DS HD capacity + wrong units all over the page
The second occurrence features an image with a floppy disk as a 'save' symbol. Tom94022 ( talk) 18:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC) Duplicate paragraph about legacy The second paragraph under Floppy_disk#Current_use is almost identical to the one under Floppy_disk#Impact_and_legacy. My suggestion is that the commercially dominant formats be retained with all failed and obscure variants be moved to List of floppy disk formats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Welshie ( talk What's colloquially known as 3½" disk is actually Sony's 90.00mm x 94.00mm design. If anyone really cares I think I can find them but again TMI Tom94022 ( talk) 06:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Confusion over physical sizes and variants "3½- and 4-inches (and Sony's 90 mm × 94 mm (3.54 in × 3.70 in) disk) " implies that there actually was a 3½" disk that wasn't the Sony design. Patent search anyone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.252.239 ( talk) 04:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC) The specifications are likely in the ANSI, ECMA or ISO standards but it is a project to get them (some are free) but I am not sure it is worth the effort since this seems like TMI. I'm guessing there's a spec and near spec implementations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.252.239 ( talk) 03:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC) Values for 3.5" DD seem to be 600, 650, 665The conflicting values indicate more research is needed. Tom94022 ( talk) 06:56, 21 September 2021 (UTC) "Citation Needed" "as the quality of recording media grew, data could be stored in a smaller area."This is simply a statement of basic logic. The ANSI standards process probably caused the medium to be dimensioned in both units of measurement. Jarrett, Shugart Corp, Computer Technology Review, Winter 1983, p. FWIW, the original proposed dimensions for the industry standard were in inches, see "The Microfloppy—One Key to Portability," Thomas R. Regardless of whether the shell or disk was dimensioned in mm or inches Sony and the industry has always referred to the medium as 3½-inch, see e.g., Sony MODEL OA-D30V OEM MANUAL for one of the earliest usages. Cool naruto games for macThe author handled the issue sufficiently. Just because something was written prior to this article does not make it more reliable than this article.No citation is needed, nor would it help the article in any way. I fail to see why basic logic needs to be explained only in the form of a quotation of somebody else saying exactly what the author said themselves. With improved media, it logically follows that users can store more data, more reliably, in a smaller physical space of the magnetic media. Apple classroom beta for macI can't back it up, but I know it's more factually correct, if for no other reason than I know that a 1.39mb file takes about 90 seconds to read off an MSDOS twist-formatted (ie quick-as-reasonably-possible/3 sectors per rotation) floppy, but less than 5 from a CDROM in a double-speed drive. And if this is in opposition to Wiki policy, then Wiki policy is flawed.Philosopher8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.248.248 ( talk) 16:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 3.5 inch read speed? I think someone's got confused over units - by no means is a CDROM only 1.2x faster than a floppy! The fact that a typical PC floppy interface, that's also designed for and used with tape backup drives, can shunt 500-1000kbit/s (kbytes, even?) down its cable has absolutely no bearing on the usual disk transfer speed, in the same way that very, very few PATA hard disks come close to 133mbyte/s even when mated to an ATA-133 controller and connected to an ATA-133 motherboard with a hi-speed cable.I'm going to try and correct it the best I can from my own knowledge although this is OR correcting OR, as I have no sources, it is at least non-confused. None of these cases applies here. That does not make them any truer or wiser just earlier.Citations should only be required when making extraordinary claims, when recounting historical events, or when it would clarify the article.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMatt ArchivesCategories |