Another disk imaging project

[Dave Dunfield]

>> 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
code.


>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...

Regards,
Dave



-- 
dave04a (at)    Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot)  Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com             Collector of vintage computing equipment:
                http://www.parse.com/~ddunfield/museum/index.html