I suppose Peter's question "How important would it be to keep an original
microdrive functional?" is twofold
Firstly to have some sort of compatability with any existing software, still
keeping it on microdrives and not converted to some other format due to
copyright/protection. It may be that the software prevents itself from
running without the microdrive being present. so having one still in
exisence may be needed.
Secondly it maybe that in order to fit a SD card based system in to the
existing QL, physical space is required for the interface that requires both
microdrives to be removed even if only one microdrive slot is replaced by
the SD card version. If it is easier to fit a single or twin SD system using
the whole space then surely this would be the preferred method?
But heres a thought, if both microdrives are replaced by the SD card
interface, could the removed microdrives be fitted in their own container
with a cable plugged in to the extension socket at the right hand side of
the QL and used as external (expanded) microdrives as an when needed, this
would solve the desire to have microdrives and still allow existing software
on the microdrive to be copied across to the new storage medium.
Lee Privett
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sent from my Laptop running XP
but emulating the QL using QPC
Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] QL SD/MMC-Card interface survey
--- On Mon, 17/1/11, Peter <pg...@q40.de> wrote:
To those who prefer option D:
* How important would it be to keep an original microdrive functional?
I would very much like to have one functional microdrive.
* How important would be speed?
Not important for me. But would be *very* nice to have something that
works without GC/SGC on the original machine.
Cheers,
Petri
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm