> Double-sided doesn't hurt anything of course, although it's too bad you can't make 3.5" flippy disks as easily as you could 5.25"!
After rereading this I wanted to make one critical point. Remember, if yours is truly the TPDD2, it already is double sided. It formats the drive as 100K per side (200K total). You use the "Bank" feature in TS-DOS to switch between which side you're accessing. So, no need to be fantasizing about flippy-floppies. ;-) It was the original TPDD that is only 100K single sided. Gary On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:04 PM, Kurt McCullum <kurt.mccul...@att.net> wrote: > Thanks Brian & Garry, > > > > I suspected that to be the case but when my HD disk appeared to work I > thought I would ask. > > > > Kurt > > > > *From:* M100 [mailto:m100-boun...@lists.bitchin100.com] *On Behalf Of *Brian > White > *Sent:* Monday, August 07, 2017 4:41 PM > *To:* m...@bitchin100.com > *Subject:* Re: [M100] 3.5" Media > > > > I wasn't using these when they were current, but... No question double > density. Aside from the dates when these things were sold, or the fact that > the actual formatting is far less than double density, or the fact that the > original utility disk that came with it is double density, which are each > solid points on their own... > > > > The manual for PDD-2 says to use cat 26-415 or 26-416, > > and those catalog numbers are not only double density but actually single > sided. > > > > Double-sided doesn't hurt anything of course, although it's too bad you > can't make 3.5" flippy disks as easily as you could 5.25"! > > > > But trying to use SD/DD read/write head signal strength on HD media is > going to either not work at all, or work very poorly/unreliably, or worse, > *appear to work but be corrupt*. Because the HD media is more sensitive > than the older media, and operates at lower signal strengths than the older > media. An SD or DD drive write signal is stronger to match the weaker media > it was meant for. So in effect you are over-driving the newer media. In > plain audio you can tell when that's happening because you actually hear > the distortion like a ripped speaker. As data, you can't hear it directly > or tell it's happening, which makes it more dangerous. They should have > made HD disks so they don't even fit in older drives. Make them slightly > longer maybe, so that old disks could still fit in new drive, but new disks > couldn't fit in old drives. The guy who sent me my copy of the utility disk > sent one of each type, and the HD copy actually works, which is what I mean > by "dangerous", because, going by that, you would conclude "It works, so, > it works." > > Jump to page 6 > http://www.classiccmp.org/cini/pdf/Tandy/Portable%20Disk%20Drive%202% > 20Operation%20Manual.pdf > > Jump to page 41 > http://www.colorcomputerarchive.com/coco/Documents/Radio%20Shack% > 20Catalogs/Tandy%20Computer%20Catalog%20and%20Software% > 20Reference%20Guide%20(1988)(Tandy).pdf > > That catalog doesn't say DD explicitly, but it does say others are HD and > 1.44M explicitly, which makes everything else not-HD by omission. > > I assume that somewhere a more authoritative reference on the catalog > numbers would show that more explicitly. > > -- > > bkw > > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Gary Weber <g...@web8201.com> wrote: > > Double Density for sure. A long time ago, I had attempted to format a > high density disk on a TPDD2 but it gave an error. I've always had > to use double density disks. > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Kurt McCullum <kurt.mccul...@att.net> > wrote: > > For those who have used a TPDD2 in the past, I have a question about > media > > type. Do these drives prefer double density (720k) or high density > (1.44mb) > > media? I've tested with both from by using recycled media from years > gone by > > and both seem to work. My primary interest in the drive is to see if I > can > > improve mComm but as I'm testing, I'd like to actually use the proper > media. > > > > Kurt > > > > > -- > Gary Weber > g...@web8201.com > > >
