3 ms·
So these disks had the exact same capacity? or could fit more data?
by ekianjo 4y ago
So these disks had the exact same capacity? or could fit more data?
- TacticalCoder 4y agoIn practice, it was the exact same identical capacity. The OS couldn't see any difference. We'd use them as exact replacement of the 3"1/2 disks. So we'd use them as double-sided 880 KB floppies.
- snvzz 4y agoThe track format is what is different. Note that in a PC, the controller abstracts the tracks from the operating system. You read and write sectors, floppy controller does everything. In an Amiga, the controller reads and writes raw data, full tracks. CPU does handle the format of the track. The track format is described in chapter 2 of the ADF FAQ[0]. The main reason it is more efficient is that there's no gaps between sectors; only one gap after the end of the track. This is because the Amiga way is to read or write a full track, starting at any sector in the track. One reason the PC's controller does not do this is the cost of RAM when the PC was introduced. A full raw track takes a significant amount of memory. 0. http://lclevy.free.fr/adflib/adf_info.html#p2 http://lclevy.free.fr/adflib/adf_info.html#p2