A new floppy drive for C64/128
Scott McDonnell
commodore 8 bit computers and the first one that came to mind was a new
(DSHD) 3.5" and 5.25" floppy drive. I am wondering if anyone has any
thoughts on this. I opened my 1581 drive and have reviewed the schematics
and noted that it uses the same floppy controller used in PC's at the time.
I have only begun my research into this, but was wondering if anyone had any
comments about this. Has anyone else attempted this or know of a reason it
cannot be done?
I have also been looking at the 64HDD cables and software and thinking it
shouldn't be too difficult to make a standalone drive which would do the
same thing. Obviously, this is done on the 64hdd website by installing a 386
PC in a 1571 drive casing. However, this seems quite expensive. I am
exploring the idea of using a PIC or Atmel microcontroller to act as a
go-between for a mass storage device (CompactFlash, Iomega Zip, CD-Rom,
HDD).
If anyone wishes to offer thier programming services to handle any hardware
I create, it would be greatly appreciated. Please Email me directly if
interested (a successful connection would mean getting a free prototype to
work with.) Keep in mind that nothing has been created yet, just ideas at
this point.
Scott McDonnell
Paul Rosenzweig
> I have been getting interested in designing new peripherals for the
> commodore 8 bit computers and the first one that came to mind was a new
> (DSHD) 3.5" and 5.25" floppy drive. I am wondering if anyone has any
The Commodore HD 3.5 inch market is saturated with the FD 2000 sold by
CLICK HERE. You may have some luck selling a Commodore 5.25 inch HD drive
but I can't make any promises. It seems to me that it's getting more and
more difficult to find 5.25 inch floppies of DD or HD varieties in retail
outlets. For the past several weeks, a second hand store has had a single
unopened box of 10 5.25 inch HD disks on their shelf without selling it. I
think you would do better with a Commodore compatible CD or DVD burner that
would use a PC compatible format. The reason why I make this suggestion is
that I have a 780 K byte GIF file on a 800k 1581 disk that won't fit on a
PC 720K 3.5 inch disk. If I had an FD 2000, I still would need an updated
version of BIG BLUE READER to move the file to a 1.44 meg 3.5 inch PC
disk. That's if more recent BBR versions can move files that big with
only a 512K REU. I would dearly love to dispense with BBR all together.
For completeness, here is the CLICK HERE entry in my rolodex
******************************************************************
* * *
* Maurice Randall's * Hi-Performance Software For *
* Click Here Software Co. * Your Commodore Computer *
* P.O. Box 606 * *
* Charlotte MI 48813 * email: arc...@delphi.com *
* * BBS: (517) 322-2386 *
* PH: (517) 543-5202 * WEB site: www.cmdrkey.com *
******************************************************************
Alex Johnson
new drive. 5.25" disks are just too hard to find, even HD ones. 3.5"
is common even though few people still use theirs, but that market is
completely owned by the FD2000 (formerly the CMD FD2000). There was
even a version that used the 2.88 MB mechanism called the FD4000. This
is a fast, reliable, and powerful device. The best purchase I ever made
for my C= following the jiffy DOS upgrade itself. There may be a market
for an IDE hard drive device. While there are already hard drives for
CBM, most are expensive SCSI interface kinds. A CDR is really out of
the question. The device needs an uninterrupted stream of data or the
disk becomes an ornament for your rear view mirror. CDRW may not suffer
this limitation, but maybe it does (it may only need 150kb/s, which is
nearly nothing to a PC but is straining the C128).
Alex
Sam Gillett
Paul Rosenzweig wrote ...
>The reason why I make this suggestion is
>that I have a 780 K byte GIF file on a 800k 1581 disk that won't fit on a
>PC 720K 3.5 inch disk. If I had an FD 2000, I still would need an updated
>version of BIG BLUE READER to move the file to a 1.44 meg 3.5 inch PC
>disk. That's if more recent BBR versions can move files that big with
>only a 512K REU. I would dearly love to dispense with BBR all together.
I think LITTLE RED READER can move that file from a 1581 to an FD-2000
_without_ using the REU. And LRR is free!
But I agree with your opinion. A Commodore compatable CD-RW drive would be
much nicer than an HD floppy drive. ;-)
Best regards,
Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!
Nathan Smith
<simst...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote:
>I have been getting interested in designing new peripherals for the
>commodore 8 bit computers and the first one that came to mind was a new
>(DSHD) 3.5" and 5.25" floppy drive. I am wondering if anyone has any
>thoughts on this. I opened my 1581 drive and have reviewed the schematics
>and noted that it uses the same floppy controller used in PC's at the time.
>I have only begun my research into this, but was wondering if anyone had any
>comments about this. Has anyone else attempted this or know of a reason it
>cannot be done?
>
>
>Scott McDonnell
>
If the floppy was like the FD2000, supported the CBM based features
but used a 100% standard mechanism with a good pice may sell a little
I find the only problem with the FD is it does not use off the shelf
mechanisms, they need to be purchased from Maurice (he modifies a Teac
drive).
Scott McDonnell
(last year) that they were planning to implement the internal IDE version,
but I haven't heard any news on it. Anyways, I have an external zip 100
(parallel) and an internal ATAPI IDE zip 100 just sitting here collecting
dust.... a commodore 64/128 (or any other 8-bit) would make good use of it.
Hasn't a CD-Writer been done (or is the key word PC compatible formatting?)
BTW, wasn't really planning to sell anything. Just putting out some feelers
for some projects to do and share with the community. These ideas are things
I have wanted for myself. However, if I can come up with any solutions, I
would freely share any of it (of course, those not capable of producing
thier own boards and such could purchase one from me.)
Scott McDonnell
"Sam Gillett" <samgi...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:pkiG8.1884$mN3...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Scott McDonnell
trying like hell to find a drive that did, and came up empty. Oh well, I
guess that is my fault for abandoning my trusty ole' 64 and Amiga 500 back
in 94. Only since last year have I been purchasing all my old equipment
again (and new stuff that I was dying to have back then.) So, I missed alot
of stuff. I never even knew there was a HDD for the commodore back then.
I agree with your opinion, Nathan (although, until now, I was unfamiliar
with the FD2000) a drive that can accept a standard drive mech would be a
major advantage. Perhaps it wasn't done that way because it isn't possible
{Famous last words: ANYTHING is possible!!} Anyways, the drive I was
envisioning would actually allow two floppies on one channel (like a PC
does) so you could have a 5.25" and 3.5" in one box.
Ok, so....a lot of good responses here. What do YOU guys think would make a
good storage solution?
CD-RW and IDE HDD's aside. A CD-RW would be cool, and with buffer underrun
protection offered in almost every modern CD-RW drive would probably
eliminate the slow data rate concerns, however, it would take you at least a
day to burn a CD (anyone want to do the math?)!!!
See if we can come up with something fast, big, and simple; faster than an
IEC floppy, WAY bigger than an IEC floppy, but just as simple (and possibly
transparent) as an IEC floppy. From what I understand about the cartridge
port, it is possible to put a wedge in there to trap the kernal functions
meant for the floppy and reroute them through new hardware as necessary.
And one last thought....someone techie might already have exlpored this
avenue before, but why wouldn't it be possible to modify a 1581 or 1541 to
handle an IDE harddrive? You have a CIA chip with 2 8-bit ports (port A,B)
which could be used to create the 16 bit addresses needed for an IDE
interface, as well as all the conversion electronics to a serial IEC stream
(although serial sucks) just need to hack it a bit and write new firmware,
me thinks (and may be wrong, since I just thought of this at work today.)
Scott McDonnell
"Nathan Smith" <stryy...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kfcjeu85m5ccc17j8...@4ax.com...
Scott McDonnell
building drives for the commodore 8 bit computers. I am pretty sure that
there are compatible chipsets (same features, etc, but not necessarily the
same pinouts and voltages) as the MOS/CSG chips, the 8255 PIA comes to mind
as well as the zilog and/or Motorola chipsset for the Z80, 8088, and 8502
(85CH11 mcu's?) From what I understand (I did not know anything about
electronics in my commodore days) the only TRUE custom chips (has no equivs)
are the VIC and SID chips (am I wrong here?)
Scott McDonnell
"Riccardo Rubini" <rru...@galactica.it> wrote in message
news:76b8501b.0205...@posting.google.com...
> "Scott McDonnell" <simst...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message
news:<F0%F8.43085$L76.46284@rwcrnsc53>...
>
> > I opened my 1581 drive and have reviewed the schematics
> > and noted that it uses the same floppy controller used in PC's at the
time.
> > I have only begun my research into this, but was wondering if anyone had
any
> > comments about this. Has anyone else attempted this or know of a reason
it
> > cannot be done?
> >
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Leinonen Mika has crafted a 1581 clone motherboard and published some
> photos on his web page:
>
> http://www.students.tut.fi/%7Eleinone3/eng.html
>
> Look there. There are other very interesting projects as well.
>
> > work with.) Keep in mind that nothing has been created yet, just ideas
at
> > this point.
> >
>
> Write in the newsgroup when you create some 1571 or 1581 clone boards.
> That would be very interesting. Imho, it would be better if you try to
> remove from the design all MOS/CSG Integrated Circuits and emulate
> their funcitons with other silicon...MOS IC's are not produced
> anymore, as you know, and if any of us would like to design a board
> off of your schematics, we would have hard times in finding 6526/8521
> or 8520 spare chips, for example.
>
> Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> new drive. 5.25" disks are just too hard to find, even HD ones. 3.5"
> is common even though few people still use theirs, but that market is
> completely owned by the FD2000 (formerly the CMD FD2000). There was
I have no problem in getting 5.25" DSDD disks here in Italy. I bought
200 new some months ago. So the situation may vary, from country to
country...
I am pretty sure in other european countries these products are still
easy to find, for somebody who knows where to look for surplus (and
has a good dose of patience).
Regarding the FD2000, which is its retail price ?
Riccardo
Marc Walters
> What about a commodore compat. zip drive? The creators of IDE64 have told
me
> (last year) that they were planning to implement the internal IDE version,
Click Here Software already makes them.
A C64 Network Interface Card would be nice, though!
Marc
Neo-Rio
conversions between C= and MSDOS. He'll most likely be selling this though,
I think, on the updated CMD utilities disk he intends to get done some time.
As for the CDR drive? Hmm... The data speed is the single biggest problem to
getting one of these to work on a C64. I image the best way to do it though
is to let Maurice update the CMD HD DOS to enable a CD buffer partition to
be created. That way, you can let the HD totally focus its energies (it has
a processor of its own) onto sending data through the SCSI port to the CDR
drive.
I have all the hardware... I just need Maurice's HD update and some CD
burning software....
...looks like I'm in for a LOOOOOONG wait.
Riccardo Rubini
> (85CH11 mcu's?) From what I understand (I did not know anything about
> electronics in my commodore days) the only TRUE custom chips (has no equivs)
> are the VIC and SID chips (am I wrong here?)
>
> Scott McDonnell
Well, talking about the C64, the 6526 and the 6510 are custom as well,
for example. The 6510 could be emulated by a 6502 and a couple of
6522, from what I've heard ( and seen on a 2 Mhz C64 project whose
archive I can't find anymore, f#@k ).
Speaking of drives, a 1581 has the following custom, made by CSG/MOS,
IC's :
6502
8520
The remaining stuff are TTL logics, the WDC1772 controller...Stuff not
as rare as CSG silicon.
The 6502 was licensed to many other companies by MOS, but I can tell
you is getting harder and harder to come across some brand new 6502's,
unless you order some huge quantities from the remaining dealers.
A list that covers the whole 6502 commercial support is available here
:
http://www.6502.org/commercial.htm
There is an interesting project called Free-6502 -
http://www.free-ip.com/6502/ - you should give a look at it, you could
keep advantage of it in your production.
The 8520 is a Commodore custom chip, used in the Amiga, mainly. It's
pin compatible with the 6526 - the C64's and C128's CIA, integrated
also in C65's 4510 PLCC - but putting one in place of the other may
cause some inconsistences when TOD clock routines are involved.
You should at least try to remove the 8520 from your 1581 clone board.
Removing the MOS 6502 would be good too, you could use a W65C816TM ,
upgrading the 1581 to a 16-bit peripheral, still with full 6502
compatibility. The only disadvantage of the 65C816 is its cost, it's
damn expensive ( I found some new for 35 EUR ).
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> Ok, so....a lot of good responses here. What do YOU guys think would make a
> good storage solution?
A 1571HD and a 1581HD sold at half the price of current available products ;-)
Riccardo
Cameron Kaiser
>Maurice has actually written a program called WCOPY to handle file
>conversions between C= and MSDOS. He'll most likely be selling this though,
>I think, on the updated CMD utilities disk he intends to get done some time.
There's a few PD DOS/FAT tools as well for the 1571/81. I hacked one to write
to my 1581 on drive 11 and it works wonderfully (albeit slow).
--
Cameron Kaiser * cka...@stockholm.ptloma.edu * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
Paul Rosenzweig
> I think LITTLE RED READER can move that file from a 1581 to an FD-2000
> _without_ using the REU. And LRR is free!
I tried to respond to your statements in the early morning when my flakey
modem locked up and I lost 2 hours of response. If my early response was
posted, then you may find the following partially replicated by the earlier
post. Please forgive me for posting two reponses to the same problem.
Since my laptop doesn't have a 5.25 " floppy drive, and I don't have an
FD 2000, the 1581 must be designated as the drive to contain the PC formatted
disk. As stated in an earlier message, I have difficulty fitting a 780K byte
file onto a 720K byte disk. Here are my other LRR problems. I have never
been successful at reading from or writing to PC formatted 3.5 " disks using
LRR and a 1581. I have been told that LRR needs factory formatted disks for
the data transfer to be successful. LRR may be unable to use disks that were
formatted on a 1581 using the BIG BLUE READER PC formatting program. The
easiest solution to my LRR problems would be a patch to fix my problems with
1581 disks and LRR. Another fix would be a program for either the PC or the
Commodore that would replicate factory PC formats on 3.5 " DD disks. The
programs for reading 1581 Commodore disks in PC drives can't handle large
enough files. I tried 1581COPY but the version I tried was unable to write
to the PC harddrive. The responses that I got when I asked for assistance
for connecting the CMD harddrive SCSI port to a PC was either inadequate or
too technical to be useful. Every way I have thought of seems to have some
insurmountable problem. When I get really desparate, I may have to buy and
learn how to use a null modem to connect the Commodore directly to the PC.
Paul Rosenzweig
> What about a commodore compat. zip drive? The creators of IDE64 have told me
> (last year) that they were planning to implement the internal IDE version,
> but I haven't heard any news on it. Anyways, I have an external zip 100
> (parallel) and an internal ATAPI IDE zip 100 just sitting here collecting
> dust.... a commodore 64/128 (or any other 8-bit) would make good use of it.
> Hasn't a CD-Writer been done (or is the key word PC compatible formatting?)
I thought CLICK HERE was toying with adapting the CMD
harddrive to use removeable ZIP disks. I must have read that
somewhere. I may have even seen a picture of the proposed
drive. See an earlier post for the CLICK HERE contact info.
Alex Johnson
I suppose that's true. I've had a great deal of trouble finding 5.25"
disks of any density in the USA. I heard a rumor that my boss's boss's
boss found a pile in his garage. I asked and it was true, but he was
reluctant to dispense with them (I only got 1). At least now I can move
.d64 images to my FD-2000 emulated partitions!
> Regarding the FD2000, which is its retail price ?
I checked www.cmdweb.de and it said "circa US$179" but they are not the
vendor any more. Check with Maurice Randall of Click Here. Be happy;
when I bought mine a few years ago it cost nearly US$300. Probably not
worth THAT much, but I felt I needed to support my fellow hobbyists.
Alex
Alex Johnson
>
> "Scott McDonnell" <simst...@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message news:<dMkG8.12282$zV.62278@sccrnsc02>...
>
> > (85CH11 mcu's?) From what I understand (I did not know anything about
> > electronics in my commodore days) the only TRUE custom chips (has no equivs)
> > are the VIC and SID chips (am I wrong here?)
> >
> > Scott McDonnell
>
> Well, talking about the C64, the 6526 and the 6510 are custom as well,
> for example. The 6510 could be emulated by a 6502 and a couple of
> 6522, from what I've heard ( and seen on a 2 Mhz C64 project whose
> archive I can't find anymore, f#@k ).
>
> Speaking of drives, a 1581 has the following custom, made by CSG/MOS,
> IC's :
>
> 6502
> 8520
>
> The remaining stuff are TTL logics, the WDC1772 controller...Stuff not
> as rare as CSG silicon.
>
> The 6502 was licensed to many other companies by MOS, but I can tell
> you is getting harder and harder to come across some brand new 6502's,
> unless you order some huge quantities from the remaining dealers.
>
> A list that covers the whole 6502 commercial support is available here
> :
>
> http://www.6502.org/commercial.htm
>
> There is an interesting project called Free-6502 -
> http://www.free-ip.com/6502/ - you should give a look at it, you could
> keep advantage of it in your production.
this is the greatest thing I've seen on the web all year! Now, has
anybody tried to do the same for the VIC? I'd like to get a hold of all
the basic C64 components, in any language. I always wanted to do my own
Commodore One type project (for about ten years, so I'm not an
immitator) but for compatibility it would be much easier to have the
original chip designs than to cross wire two different computers on one
board, like they did with the C128. What a headache that design is.
Alex
Alex Johnson
>
> Ok, so....a lot of good responses here. What do YOU guys think would make a
> good storage solution?
> CD-RW and IDE HDD's aside. A CD-RW would be cool, and with buffer underrun
> protection offered in almost every modern CD-RW drive would probably
> eliminate the slow data rate concerns, however, it would take you at least a
> day to burn a CD (anyone want to do the math?)!!!
> See if we can come up with something fast, big, and simple; faster than an
> IEC floppy, WAY bigger than an IEC floppy, but just as simple (and possibly
> transparent) as an IEC floppy. From what I understand about the cartridge
> port, it is possible to put a wedge in there to trap the kernal functions
> meant for the floppy and reroute them through new hardware as necessary.
If not CD-RW, then the coolest, smallest, most convenient solution I've
found are the USB keychains. There are also PCMCIA versions. Solid
state storage in a small form factor. PC people shy away from them
because they have limited storage and cost a lot, but for a C= product
you could easily get by with a 16MB memory, and it won't matter how slow
it is to write to the card because the C= is almost assuredly slower.
I'd kill (my PC) for a USB connected 3.5" HD floppy drive and/or a
USB/PCMCIA flash "drive".
Alex
Axell
Alex Johnson wrote:
> A CDR is really out of
> the question. The device needs an uninterrupted stream of data or the
> disk becomes an ornament for your rear view mirror. CDRW may not suffer
> this limitation, but maybe it does (it may only need 150kb/s, which is
> nearly nothing to a PC but is straining the C128).
Let alone the number of multi sessions that you would have on a CD.
Yet, 64HDD, or a hardware/software x86 hack with a combined
harddrive/CDR would do the trick. As a c64 treats a drive as a separate
computer, all you would need is something like:
OPEN 15,12,15,"W0:\MYCRAP\*:D1":CLOSE 15
or something other that is CBM DOS friendly. The x86 is fast enough to
emulate the VIA over a parallel port and handle the streaming to the CDR.
Riccardo Rubini
> > Regarding the FD2000, which is its retail price ?
>
> I checked www.cmdweb.de and it said "circa US$179" but they are not the
> vendor any more. Check with Maurice Randall of Click Here. Be happy;
> when I bought mine a few years ago it cost nearly US$300. Probably not
> worth THAT much, but I felt I needed to support my fellow hobbyists.
>
> Alex
Alex, I don't what to be unfair with Maurice, but if the price is
still 300$, well, imho, it's too much. I have three 1581, two bought
on eBay. They costed me ~100 EUR each. I don't understand where are
the advantages in having a FD2000. Capacity ? Well, many of us have
all their C= stuff stored on CD-R's anyway. I thought many times about
getting rid of old dusty diskettes and create custom ones on the fly
off of my CD's on a need basis. Speed ? The 1581 with a C128 is pretty
good, I guess is even faster than C65's internal FDD with latest ROM
revisions. Reliability ? A 1581 with a WD1772 controller is reliable,
never experienced problems...Finally, for a Commodore hobbist, the
1581 is easy to repair, it has only one custom CSG IC, the 8520, all
the remaining stuff could be found at electronic dealers, with some
patience and luck.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
Ciao Alex,
> this is the greatest thing I've seen on the web all year! Now, has
> anybody tried to do the same for the VIC? I'd like to get a hold of all
The success of the Free-6502 project is, imho, in the fact that this
processor is shared by many computers of the late seventies - early
eighties. Apple computers, Atari, Commodore - they all used the 6502
as CPU in many of their projects. So Free-6502 gathers interest of
many users, not only Commodore ones.
The VIC-II or the VIC chips are very specific, so you can count only
on Commodore users when it comes for VHDL coding. Who has some VHDL
coding skills here and is reading ? :-)
> the basic C64 components, in any language. I always wanted to do my own
> Commodore One type project
I would like a C64 clone, just a C64, without any additional hardware
(monster SID, Super VIC etc) and software (ie. modified ROMs) stuff.
Like the original, but running on modern silicon.
Riccardo
Hunters
<SNIP>
>
> > I think LITTLE RED READER can move that file from a 1581 to an FD-2000
> > _without_ using the REU. And LRR is free!
>
<SNIP>
> Since my laptop doesn't have a 5.25 " floppy drive, and I don't have an
> FD 2000, the 1581 must be designated as the drive to contain the PC formatted
> disk. As stated in an earlier message, I have difficulty fitting a 780K byte
> file onto a 720K byte disk. Here are my other LRR problems. I have never
> been successful at reading from or writing to PC formatted 3.5 " disks using
> LRR and a 1581. I have been told that LRR needs factory formatted disks for
> the data transfer to be successful. LRR may be unable to use disks that were
> formatted on a 1581 using the BIG BLUE READER PC formatting program. The
> easiest solution to my LRR problems would be a patch to fix my problems with
> 1581 disks and LRR. Another fix would be a program for either the PC or the
> Commodore that would replicate factory PC formats on 3.5 " DD disks. The
> programs for reading 1581 Commodore disks in PC drives can't handle large
> enough files. I tried 1581COPY but the version I tried was unable to write
> to the PC harddrive.
<SNIP>
> When I get really desparate, I may have to buy and
> learn how to use a null modem to connect the Commodore directly to the PC.
Hello,
I also had difficulty transferring MS-DOS disks to read properly in a
1581 drive with my 1581's original drive mechanism. There was nothing
wrong with the mechanism, alignment and such were all fine. Turned
out that the 1581 was just not able to reliably read PC formatted
disks. I believe it had something to do with the way PC 1.44 Meg
drives write their info, compared to the 1581. Low density drives
utilize a stronger magnetic recording method than high density drives.
I believe that this is the source of the problem. When I replaced my
1581's mechanism with a PC high density mechanism (some interface
modification required), I was able to read MS-DOS disks with no
trouble (Although still limited to 720K disks by the 1581's built-in
controller). This cured the problem and worked 100% reliably.
The only downside to the PC mechanism is that the eject button doesn't
properly line up with the 1581's button hole. I just left the button
removed and used a nylon stick to eject my disks. I did miss my eject
button, but for a cheap cure, it worked great. If you are into
hacking your equipment (I'm Not), then you could just modify the face
plate to handle the PC mechanism's button or entire face-plate (I
personally would do anything but cut into vintage plastic).
Eventually, I obtained a FD-2000 and since it can handle both high
density and low density disks, I now use it to read all my MS-DOS
formatted disks. My 1581 is now restored back to it's stock condition
with it's original mechanism and working great as a dedicated CBM
device (with an eject button!!!!).
Anyway, hope this helps shed some light on your troubles, if you need
information on performing the modification, or would like someone to
do it for you, email me directly. Rest assured that it is not a
software problem (Little Red Reader works great). I have transferred
hundreds of disks with it.
Michael Hunter
hunt...@mac.com
Sam Gillett
Scott McDonnell wrote ...
>What about a commodore compat. zip drive? The creators of IDE64 have told
>me (last year) that they were planning to implement the internal IDE
>version, but I haven't heard any news on it. Anyways, I have an external
>zip 100 (parallel) and an internal ATAPI IDE zip 100 just sitting here
>collecting dust.... a commodore 64/128 (or any other 8-bit) would make
>good use of it.
Since you are just looking for ideas anyway... How about a ZIP drive
adapter box? Just plug the adapter into a C64/128. Then plug an external
type ZIP drive into the adapter.
The expansion port would offer the greatest transfer speeds, however, there
is a drawback. It would not work with most software. Using the serial
port would make it compatible with most productivity and communications
software. And even a few games would work! ;-)
Sam Gillett
Paul Rosenzweig wrote [less a few snips]...
>Please forgive me for posting two reponses to the same problem.
The earlier post didn't show up. Even if it had, no problem. ;-)
>As stated in an earlier message, I have difficulty fitting a 780K byte
>file onto a 720K byte disk.
I don't know where it went, but I once had a program that would split large
files into smaller ones, and put them back together again. I had one
program that worked on the Commodore side, and another that worked on the
PC side. I lost the PC program once and wrote a replacement myself using
QuickBasic. That took me about two hours. If I could do it, then it isn't
that hard to do! :-)
>Here are my other LRR problems. I have never
>been successful at reading from or writing to PC formatted 3.5 " disks
>using LRR and a 1581. I have been told that LRR needs factory formatted
>disks for the data transfer to be successful.
I once thought that myself because my 1581's will not read a disk formatted
on my PC. I think that I posted something about it here. I have since
learned that both my 1581's (and LRR) work fine with 720k disks formatted
on my wife's PC. If disks formatted on your PC won't work for you, try
formatting on a friends PC. Just might work!
>When I get really desparate, I may have to buy and learn how to use a
>null modem to connect the Commodore directly to the PC.
I have been successful in using a regular telephone cable to connect a
Commodore modem to a PC modem. I have been told that with some modems it
will be necessary to connect a transistor radio battery across the
telephone cable.
At 1200 baud your 780k file will transfer in a little less than two hours.
28,800 baud will be a lot faster! ;-)
Scott McDonnell
think may actually work more easily, but is more expensive) If it is
possible to FULLY emulate a 1541, 1581,1571, etc. using a flash drive, then
disk images could be created as partitions temporarily (separate the
multiple partitions into multiple device numbers, maybe??) and would answer
all IEC drive requests, etc..so as far as the commodore is concerned, it IS
speaking to a 1541, etc... just some thoughts.
Scott
"Riccardo Rubini" <rru...@galactica.it> wrote in message
news:76b8501b.02052...@posting.google.com...
Scott McDonnell
8-bit commodores (there have been 8 bit ISA ethernet cards in the past) The
real problem lies in the fact that the software required to handle the
packets, etc. may be too large (you need to run a TCP/IP stack, some kind of
networking client, etc..) to run on a commodore64 (although maybe some RAM
buffer would do the trick) I have right now on my desk an 8-bit PIC
microcontroller board which is internet and web server capable. If this
micro can do it, then a commodore can do it (however, the slowest this mcu
goes is 4mhz, configured at 20mhz for the web.)
At any rate, I thought that I did see this capability already being
produced. I'll do a net search and let you know if I find it again.
Scott McDonnell
"Marc Walters" <ma...@objectconnections.com> wrote in message
news:OcoG8.2203$06.2...@nasal.pacific.net.au...
Jason Petersen
> I thought many times about
> getting rid of old dusty diskettes and create custom ones on the fly
> off of my CD's on a need basis. Speed ? The 1581 with a C128 is pretty
> good, I guess is even faster than C65's internal FDD with latest ROM
> revisions. Reliability ? A 1581 with a WD1772 controller is reliable,
> never experienced problems...Finally, for a Commodore hobbist, the
> 1581 is easy to repair, it has only one custom CSG IC, the 8520, all
> the remaining stuff could be found at electronic dealers, with some
> patience and luck.
Young Padawan, what you fail to understand is the DOS compatibility
offered by the CMD drives. The FD-2000 offers 1541, 1571, and 1581
partitions for your pleasure, in addition to the increased speed and
storage space afforded by the device. The native mode directories and
JiffyDOS compatibility are but icing on the cake.
--
Jason Petersen
Scott McDonnell
website (http://www.64hdd.com/c64-proj.html#usb64) author is actually even
working on it (well, had mentioned the idea on his page, anyhow.)
I think this is a great idea as it solves alot of problems with one thing.
USB is so universal that it could be used with numerous peripherals and
also used to network.
What I don't like about the USB idea (and doesn't mean it is dead in my
mind) is that software drivers will need to exist which cause
incompatibility issues and perhaps be limited only to people with RAMLinks
and REUs coming out the wahoo.
The absolute, ideal, numero uno solution (IMHO) is a drive which perfectly
emulates a commodore drive. Basically, it handles all calls to the drive,
then handles the storage device, then reformats the data as needed, and
finally serves it back to the commodore along with all signals needed to
make the commodore think it is talking to a normal drive. As far as the
commodore is concerned it is speaking to a dusty old commodore drive. In
it's most ideal form, no program would be incompatible, no inconveniences,
no new commands to learn...etc...
BTW, would a cartridge be able to wedge between the CPU and where it
normally expects the drives to be connected, in effect allowing faster
transfers but 100% compatability? I mean, without cutting out the CIA
normally used for the IEC transfers. Obviously, fastload carts could
override the kernel. If anyone knows, please help me out before wasting time
on that route.
This is why 64HDD works so well. I guess whatever storage solution I decide
on creating, will essentially be a standalone 64HDD type device.
Let me give you all my most recent train of thought:
The 64HDD requires a computer connected through a cable to the IEC port on
the commodore.
The problem with this concept is that it is either expensive OR bulky (iow:
the cheaper the solution, the bigger the box) as well as wasteful, since
there are many more parts to the computer that are NOT being used. Also,
ideally, I would like this device dedicated to the commodore, so it would
serve one purpose and do one thing very well, it would always be ready for
the commodore, as it being it's only purpose. No matter how you slice it, it
comes back to being wasteful to use a PC to do it.
Assuming you want to use a PC anyway under the above criteria, you would
want this ideal setup:
a single-board computer (in 3.5" form factor would be perfect), a
compactFlash disk can be used as a bootable drive (can you tell I am biased
towards compactflash, yet?), so you would need no HDD (the software and even
MS-DOS could easily fit on a 32mb CF disk.) You could mount this computer, a
3.5" floppy, a CD-R, and maybe even an internal ZIP drive in a relatively
small case. Might even squeeze a microATX power supply in there as well.
However, you are talking several hundred dollars for this setup.
All you really need are:
Two IDE channels (1 compactflash, 1 cdr, 1 internal zip; IDE has two devices
per channel)
A parallel/serial port for the connection to the commodore
1 Floppy port (supports 2 devices)
Software to run the server proggie
This can be reduced even further to a device with a flash memory, which sits
between a PC and a commodore, you manage the device with the PC, and can
even disconnect it from the PC at this point and use it simply connected to
the commodore.
All the above solutions would serve the same purpose. Basically, the idea is
to reduce the amount of hardware/software needed to the most minimal point
and still serve the same purpose. This is where "my" chain of thought has
been going. It seems this entire setup could be reduced to some sort of
flash media, a device which connects to the commodore, and can also be used
on a PC (although not necessary, unless you are using disk images stored on
CD, etc...) I guess I have convinced myself that this is this best route. I
have yet to explore USB (check out http://www.dontronics.com/giga.html) and
have not looked into smartmedia yet.
Please keep this discussion going if it is interesting however, I have
gained some very helpful insights from this thread. Thanks for all the
responses!!
BTW, one very important question: If anyone here owns a 64HDD, could you
give me your opinion of it? I am planning to build the cable and get the
starcommander software and try it out myself, but am curious as to it's
limitations, frustrating aspects, etc. Since most of my ideas center around
the concept of the 64HDD, I would like to avoid them with whatever I come up
wth.
Scott McDonnell
(sorry about the super long posts)
Scott McDonnell
Scott McDonnell
"Riccardo Rubini" <rru...@galactica.it> wrote in message
news:76b8501b.02052...@posting.google.com...
Scott McDonnell
have been thinking of Smartcards) and it is not serial at all (and
supposedly cheaper than compactflash): 8 data lines, 5 address lines.
Actually, just a direct connection to a NAND flash memory chip. From the
description it sounds kinda flaky, but I will probably do some more research
on it, since it sounds pretty easy to interface to the commodore computer
(no full IDE interface needed, at least I was right about the "easier"
part.)
Here's the site if anyone is interested:
http://www.elm-chan.org/docs/sm_e.html
Might even be interested (if you are into electronics) in this link which
sent me to the one above: http://www.elm-chan.org/works/mpc/report_e.html
Scott McDonnell
Nicolas Welte
> description it sounds kinda flaky, but I will probably do some more research
> on it, since it sounds pretty easy to interface to the commodore computer
> (no full IDE interface needed, at least I was right about the "easier"
> part.)
Did you look at the 8bit mode of CF cards? It can't get easier than that, the
CF will interface directly to the C64 system bus.
Nicolas
Riccardo Rubini
> Young Padawan, what you fail to understand is the DOS compatibility
> offered by the CMD drives. The FD-2000 offers 1541, 1571, and 1581
Dear Jedi Knight, as I am sure you know, 1571 and 1581 models are both
compatible with MS-DOS formats, they both can handle MFM encoding...
BBR, LRR...No, it's not the sound of hordes of clones firing their
lasers...I am talking about Big Blue Reader and Little Red Reader. I
don't see any innovative feature brought by CMD drives, and if there
is any, its price is definitely more appropiate on Naboo.
May the force be with thee...
Riccardo
Alex Johnson
I said it was $300 a few years ago. I quoted a web page with a price
silimar to what you paid for a used 1581. With the FD2000 you get:
bigger (1.6MB FD2000 formatted for CBM, 1.44MB for IBM; 3.2MB FD4000
formatted for CBM, 2.88MB for IBM)
faster (faster mechanism, faster ROM commands, hardware cache)
compatible (100% compatible for 1541, 1571, and 1581 unless the
application tries to manipulate the control program, then the ROM will
obviously look different)
CMD stuff (native jiffy dos support, native mode partitions, emulation
mode partitions, REAL subdirectories)
There is no comparison. A FD2000 is better than a 1581 in every way
except maybe if you insist on having the C= brand name on your
electronics. You'll pay a little more, but you also get a real time
clock option so your files are dated and you can set the computer time
off the drive as well, and it is more compact, and it is newer so fewer
failures from aging parts.
Alex
Paul Rosenzweig
> I also had difficulty transferring MS-DOS disks to read properly in a
> 1581 drive with my 1581's original drive mechanism. There was nothing
> wrong with the mechanism, alignment and such were all fine. Turned
> out that the 1581 was just not able to reliably read PC formatted
> disks. I believe it had something to do with the way PC 1.44 Meg
> drives write their info, compared to the 1581. Low density drives
> utilize a stronger magnetic recording method than high density drives.
> I believe that this is the source of the problem. When I replaced my
> 1581's mechanism with a PC high density mechanism (some interface
> modification required), I was able to read MS-DOS disks with no
> trouble (Although still limited to 720K disks by the 1581's built-in
> controller). This cured the problem and worked 100% reliably.
The reason why I think the problem is in LITTLE RED READER is because
I have only mild problems with BIG BLUE READER for files of modest
size. A problem with BBR is that WINDOWS uses twice as much space
for a directory entry as the BBR anticipated directory format. As
a consequence when BBR reads a directory, interspersed between the
WINDOWS directory entries are spurious entries that are clearly
not the names of real files on the disk. If I point BBR to a real
directory entry, BBR reads the data on the disk correctly. WINDOWS
has no difficulty reading the data written by BBR. The MAJOR
problems occur when the file sizes saturate the REU. BBR fills
up the REU, writes a data segment to the file, and incorrectly
processes the subsequent data that is transfered to the REU on
its odessy between the computer and MS DOS disk. Because LRR
doesn't buffer the data, I was hoping that it would fill the gap
that my version of BBR has. Unfortunately, the LRR 1581 problems
are more severe then the BBR large file problems. For the most
part, BBR serves my Commodore - PC transfer needs quite nicely.
Scott McDonnell
I have alot of them. Finally got one to play with the other day (64MB). I
did read that there is a native 8 bit mode.
Thanks for the heads up, though!!
Scott
"Nicolas Welte" <we...@chemie.uni-konstanz.de> wrote in message
news:3CEB57D0...@chemie.uni-konstanz.de...
Paul Rosenzweig
> I have been successful in using a regular telephone cable to connect a
> Commodore modem to a PC modem. I have been told that with some modems it
> will be necessary to connect a transistor radio battery across the
> telephone cable.
>
> At 1200 baud your 780k file will transfer in a little less than two hours.
> 28,800 baud will be a lot faster! ;-)
Thanks for the tip. I have a couple of 56 K baud modems and a SWIFTLink.
Maybe I'll try a dry run some day once I get my tax troubles cleared up.
Adam Dunkels
>> A C64 Network Interface Card would be nice, though!
>
> Didn't skip over this idea. I think this is something easily created for
> the 8-bit commodores (there have been 8 bit ISA ethernet cards in the
> past) The real problem lies in the fact that the software required to
> handle the packets, etc. may be too large (you need to run a TCP/IP stack,
> some kind of networking client, etc..) to run on a commodore64 (although
> maybe some RAM buffer would do the trick) I have right now on my desk an
> 8-bit PIC microcontroller board which is internet and web server capable.
> If this micro can do it, then a commodore can do it (however, the slowest
> this mcu goes is 4mhz, configured at 20mhz for the web.)
> At any rate, I thought that I did see this capability already being
> produced. I'll do a net search and let you know if I find it again.
You are definately right in that it isn't very hard to make a C64 network
interface. Peter Eliasson and I have made one, called TFE (The Final
Ethernet :-), and it works like a charm: http://dunkels.com/adam/tfe/
There was quite a lot of fuzz when we announced it about a month ago. I
guess people were a little bit amazed when they saw that a regular C64 was
able to not "just" run a web server, but also stream live audio (sampled
from the cassette player).
Our C64 server had over 80000 visitors during the first two weeks online and
served over 10000 web pages during one of the most busy hours :-). The C64
is still online at http://tfe.c64.org/
/adam
--
Adam Dunkels <ad...@dunkels.net> (Spambait)
http://dunkels.com/adam/
mike
Also, I prefer firewire to USB. Mainly to stay away from the MS/Intel cartell.
I hate it when a good standard exists and then a major company supports another
standard that is not as good (at the time), and then every manufacturere
suddenly supports the 'new standard'. There are enough standards already.
I will get off my bandstand now.
In article <3CEA64B0...@acm.org>, Alex Johnson <comp...@acm.org> writes:
>
>If not CD-RW, then the coolest, smallest, most convenient solution I've
>found are the USB keychains. There are also PCMCIA versions. Solid
>state storage in a small form factor. PC people shy away from them
>because they have limited storage and cost a lot, but for a C= product
>you could easily get by with a 16MB memory, and it won't matter how slow
>it is to write to the card because the C= is almost assuredly slower.
>I'd kill (my PC) for a USB connected 3.5" HD floppy drive and/or a
>USB/PCMCIA flash "drive".
Mike
University Place Commodore User Group (UPCHUG)
Tacoma WA, USA
Sam Gillett
Alex Johnson wrote ...
>There is no comparison. A FD2000 is better than a 1581 in every way
>except maybe if you insist on having the C= brand name on your
>electronics. You'll pay a little more, but you also get a real time
>clock option so your files are dated and you can set the computer time
>off the drive as well, and it is more compact, and it is newer so fewer
>failures from aging parts.
You left out another important advantage of the FD2000. You mentioned the
greater capacity, but didn't point out that the greater capacity is
achieved by the use of DSHD disks.
The DSDD disks needed for the 1581 are getting harder to find as they are
no longer being manufactured. When the current supply runs out, finding
disks will be, at best, a scavenger hunt.
The DSHD disks used by the FD2000 are still being manufactured and should
be easy to get for several more years. Thus, the FD2000 has a longer
useful life than the 1581.
Scott McDonnell
This is what I have already convinced myself to do. Especially now that I
know there is a normal 8-bit native mode to compact flash (as well as full
IDE support.) I am not so sure (will research it tonight) that the
microdrive can operate under the native 8-bit mode. If not, then a full IDE
interface would be needed anyway, and at that point it would be cheaper to
just buy a 2.5 or 3.5 IDE HDD instead of a microdrive. I do like the
microdrives though, would make for a really small interface (cartridge
anyone?)
I need to do some more research into what is needed, etc. Still going to
need a firmware person to help me write the assembly needed to make ROMs and
(hopefully not) any drivers needed. Ideally, I would like whatever I create
to work under commodore basic and not require GEOS or WHEELS and be
indistinguishable to a commodore drive. But, we all know how "ideally" goes.
Scott McDonnell
"mike" <green...@aol.comnone> wrote in message
news:20020522172559...@mb-mk.aol.com...
Leinonen Mika
>avenue before, but why wouldn't it be possible to modify a 1581 or 1541 to
>handle an IDE harddrive? You have a CIA chip with 2 8-bit ports (port A,B)
>which could be used to create the 16 bit addresses needed for an IDE
>interface, as well as all the conversion electronics to a serial IEC stream
>(although serial sucks) just need to hack it a bit and write new firmware,
>me thinks (and may be wrong, since I just thought of this at work today.)
-----
Does anyone know if the transformer in 1541 provides enough power for
CD-ROM-drives? (With a switch mode power supply for efficiency.)
You could put a CD, 3.5" floppy and HDD inside the case. 64HDD could
be used with a very small PC in the 1541 case.
Scott McDonnell
have missed that section. Thanks for pointing it out!
Scott
"Leinonen Mika" <lein...@assari.cc.tut.fi> wrote in message
news:acht4k$t6n$1...@news.cc.tut.fi...
Scott McDonnell
hardware would not be very difficult, as I mentioned the software would be
the real PITA, but you did it! Sending you a private mail as well.
Scott
"Adam Dunkels" <ad...@dunkels.net> wrote in message
news:acgldt$eb9$1...@not.sics.se...
Scott McDonnell
site, you will see that the author of this hardware took a 1571 drive,
removed the 1571 mech and installed a 386 mobo, power supply and other
goodies in it. He is using an old AT type power supply (probably one from a
packard bell or something (those are usually small 150W supplies). However,
in my local computer parts store I found microATX supplies (250W) which are
very very small. You could easily fit one in an old style 1541 along with
just about everything else you mentioned (and still have room for a CARD
based singleboard computer) You can browse some links for these types of
computers at:
http://www.siliconpenguin.com/Hardware/X86_Based_Products/Single_Board_Compu
ters/
I mentioned this route in a previous post, but dispelled it only because it
seems so expensive and such a waste. A microcontroller board could be
developed which would do all of this instead of a full-blown PC for a much
cheaper price. Since this device would serve ONE purpose, a microcontroller
based design would seem much less of a waste.
Just my opinion, though. I am nearly positive that the 1541 transformer
could not supply enough power to run all of those devices (*maybe* JUST the
CD-ROM). Besides, a microATX supply ($30USD at my local store) is about the
same size as that transformer and supplies more power than you could
possibly need for this purpose! Keep my bootable compact flash (to replace
the HDD with DOS and starcommander on it) idea in mind if you decide to
build one of these. It will save you tons of room. A 32MB CompactFlash is
big enough to store DOS, drivers, and star commander with a little capacity
left to spare (and it's quiet!) All you need is a CF to IDE adapter (about
$20USD.)
If you are seriously considering this approach, let me know and I will
provide links to sources for this stuff. I have already researched it and
considered this approach myself (was going to use a custom case though...a 3
bay SCSI drive case, which has it's own power supply ~$89USD)
Scott
"Leinonen Mika" <lein...@assari.cc.tut.fi> wrote in message
news:acht4k$t6n$1...@news.cc.tut.fi...
bud
Hi Nicolas:
Group: comp.sys.cbm Date: Wed, May 22, 2002, 10:33am (CDT+7) From:
we...@chemie.uni-konstanz.de (Nicolas Welte)
script:
>Did you look at the 8bit mode of CF
>cards? It can't get easier than that,
>the CF will interface directly to the
>C64 system bus.
>Nicolas
Given that, even so, both CF and SMART sound good to me. I think that
Smart has the potential for a universal data transfer medium like
floppies, if the developers get their act together and settle on a
single standard that the comsumers will support.
salaam,
dowcom
--
http://community.webtv.net/dowcom/DOWCOMSAMSTRADGUIDE
DOShead Credo:
a) Try it! It might work.
b) GOTO a).
Scott McDonnell
a CF card can be in IDE mode and still only need 8 bit transfers (has an
internal buffer: HI byte, LOW byte configuration) But that doesn't even
matter! The contents of the memory are the same no matter what. So, if you
take the CF card, plug it into a drive on your PC, throw D64 images on it,
etc... even doing 8-bit native (or 8-bit IDE) on the C64 side, you can gain
access to the files as they are originally written. The only drawback is
that quite a bit of code is needed to read the FAT and decypher where the
file is located (this is in memory mode: 8-bit native) But it this makes it
cross compatible! This makes me even more convinced than before.
The sectors on a CF card are 512 bytes, even if you only need to store (or
read) 1 byte. This is a little wasteful (still better than a PC fat system.)
The document I was reading didn't go into a terrible lot of detail about it,
so I need to do some more digging. I am thinking that the internal CF
controller does some management to squeeze as much room as possible out of
the memory, which would mean fragmenting files to fill the 512 bytes. You
guys seem to know some about the CF media, any info you can give me about
this?
I unfortunately only have the documents from SanDisk's developer support.
The compactflash association won't give you anything unless you become a
member.
Scott McDonnell
"bud" <dow...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:11856-3C...@storefull-2211.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Alex Johnson
>
> Why not compact flash compatability? Then you could use the IBM microdrive.
> Also, I prefer firewire to USB. Mainly to stay away from the MS/Intel cartell.
> I hate it when a good standard exists and then a major company supports another
> standard that is not as good (at the time), and then every manufacturere
> suddenly supports the 'new standard'. There are enough standards already.
I also prefer firewire to USB but I'm smarter than suggesting such a
thing. Almost no computers have firewire ports and they are seldom
compatible (there are three or four variations of port voltage and pin
count/orientation that I am aware of). On the other hand, try to name a
computer manufactured in the last two years that does NOT have USB. So
if you want to just unplug your device from the C= and plug it into the
PC/MAC/Unix workstation (quick and easy way to transfer files!) you go
with USB.
Honestly it doesn't matter to me if it is compact flash or any other
solid state system. The important part is #1 compatibility (the USB
keychains don't need new drivers to just plug into any computer of any
OS), #2 low power requirement, #3 silence (no moving parts means no
noise and less failures), #4 speed, #5 small size. Microdrives don't
meet these requirements but they do better than other drives. I don't
think CF cards even meet my first requirement, but probably are good
enough for the rest.
Alex
K. Smith
> I have been getting interested in designing new peripherals for the
> commodore 8 bit computers and the first one that came to mind was a
> new (DSHD) 3.5" and 5.25" floppy drive. I am wondering if anyone has
> any thoughts on this. I opened my 1581 drive and have reviewed the
> schematics and noted that it uses the same floppy controller used in
> PC's at the time. I have only begun my research into this, but was
> wondering if anyone had any comments about this. Has anyone else
> attempted this or know of a reason it cannot be done?
I have a drive on hand with this exact same hack. I can tell you this
much: it not that hard. One pin cut on the board side 34-pin header, a
couple others jumpered to each other at their solder joints underneath, a
power cable soldered onto the board with the proper molex plug, a ribbon
cable that goes from the 34-pin header to a card-edge floppy connector, and
that's about all I can find on it that isn't stock. I bought it off a guy
on eBay and he said he got his advice from someone who worked at CMD. What
he sent me was a bit messy, but I packed it away really nicely in a 1541-II
case (It's amazine how well it all fits). I use an external 1541-II/1581
power supply. It formats a DSDD flopyy the same as a 1581 disk. The
downside? It's not compatible with any other drives and really only good
for mass storage. Maybe with a hacked version of 1581Copy that points to a
5.25 drive instead of a 3.5 drive, it could be used for easy and cheap
transfers.
While I'm mentioning, I can't decide what to call this drive. 1585 comes
to mind. Or how about 1561?
Kevin
Scott McDonnell
hack was done. Are you talking about 1 drive with both 5.25" and 3.5" (like
an old PC combo disk drive) is it still DSDD or can it do DSHD disks?
Scott
"K. Smith" <ksmi...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Xns921A278CC664ks...@207.217.77.25...
K. Smith
> Have any pictures of the hack to offer up? I am not sure I understand
> what hack was done. Are you talking about 1 drive with both 5.25" and
> 3.5" (like an old PC combo disk drive) is it still DSDD or can it do
> DSHD disks? Scott
I'll try to take a few shots tomorrow. I guess I should have done that
before I put it all together! Actually, I need to take it apart to reverse
the power/drive LEDs because the "drive" stays on and the "power" shows
activity. :)
What it is is a slightly modified 1581 board attached to a PC 5.25 floppy
drive. I installed it all into a 1541-II case and use the 1541-II power
supply. So, outside of the lock/eject lever being the wrong shape and
color, and some minor Dremel work on the backside, the drive looks exactly
like a 1541-II. It formats 5.25 DSDD disks as if they were 1581 disks.
Kevin
Dave R.
>While I'm mentioning, I can't decide what to call this drive. 1585
>comes to mind. Or how about 1561?
>
>Kevin
1561 is taken: http://www.floodgap.com/retrobits/ckb/secret/periph.html
1585 is good :)