Dan Chisarick wrote:
>
> Older drives use a mechanical switch (push-button), newer drives use a
> beam of light. While I've never done it, I can't imagine it being harder
> than connecting the wires that went to the mechanism to a toggle-switch...
Since the only drives that I use to do this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 07/28/2001 12:53:11 AM Central Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Ah, no you don't! Just take your disk drive out and modify it to close the
> circuit on the write-protect mechanism. I have one drive modified this way
> specifica
Jim Leonard boldly stated:
>
>"Lee K. Seitz" wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, one thing was an Apple II copy of Ulitma IV. (Only seems to
>> be missing the Ankh.) I tried the first disk out (the program disk)
>> and it doesn't work. Even worse, the disks came write protected from
>> the factory, so to re-
>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: [SWCollect] Labels and value (was: Ultimas)
> In a message dated 07/28/2001 12:53:11 AM Central Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Ah, no you don't! Just take your disk drive out
In a message dated 07/28/2001 12:53:11 AM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Ah, no you don't! Just take your disk drive out and modify it to close the
circuit on the write-protect mechanism. I have one drive modified this way
specifically for this purpose. Don't cut a hole
"Lee K. Seitz" wrote:
>
> Anyway, one thing was an Apple II copy of Ulitma IV. (Only seems to
> be missing the Ankh.) I tried the first disk out (the program disk)
> and it doesn't work. Even worse, the disks came write protected from
> the factory, so to re-write the data, I'd have to cut not
"Lee K. Seitz" wrote:
>
> Me, too. Although, as I keep telling you guys but I'll repeat for the
> new subscribers, I'm not really a software collector. I just got
> interested in it after seeing so much of it at the thrifts stores
> while I'm out looking for Atari 2600 cartridges, etc. Odds ar
Jim Leonard boldly stated:
>
>If the disk went bad and you copied the code back, I would consider that
>"restoration", much like restoring a classic 300-yr-old painting.
>But I'm very anal about this: It would have to be an IDENTICAL copy, bit for
>bit, even with copy-protection intact -- NOT a
C.E. Forman boldly stated:
>
>On a relevant tangent: Suppose you HAD a genuine original disk (with label
>intact) and it went bad. So you recopied the code back onto the original
>disk. At this point, can you honestly claim it's the true original anymore?
>Is it worth more with the original (det
Pedro Quaresma wrote:
>
> I may ask a third question: what determines if you have an original game or
> not? I think we all agree that I have the original game if I have the
> original floppies, but the question is (are?), do I have an original if
> a) I have manual, box, everything complete, etc
"C.E. Forman" wrote:
>
> > Here's a moral/ethical question I'd like to pose to the group: If you
> have the
> > original label but no disk, is it "valid" if you copy the original disk
> from
> > somewhere and just slap the label on? I know that you can only get the
> label
> > from RG in this c
> I may ask a third question: what determines if you have an original game
or
> not? I think we all agree that I have the original game if I have the
> original floppies, but the question is (are?), do I have an original if
> a) I have manual, box, everything complete, etc but no original floppies
About Jim's original question, I agree. I would keep it safe, or frame it.
In the very least, if I were to apply it to a floppy, it would have to be
one exactly like the original.
About the second question, I guess it's once again a Data Preservers vs
Collectors thing. I'm with Chris, but I assu
> Here's a moral/ethical question I'd like to pose to the group: If you
have the
> original label but no disk, is it "valid" if you copy the original disk
from
> somewhere and just slap the label on? I know that you can only get the
label
> from RG in this case, but since the disk itself isn't t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 07/27/2001 2:49:39 AM Central Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << Tom, I think Jason's was handsigned too...
>
> But you probably know better, and as I've been stating so many wrong facts
> lately... :)
> >>
>
> Jason put his to
15 matches
Mail list logo
