RE: Track/Sectors for older Drives, eg D9090

ncoplin_at_orbeng.com
Date: 2003-08-27 06:19:32

Hi All, thansk for the information so far... certainly helps!

>>What I'm after is "logical" info, that is the layout a programmer would
use.
>>I am thinking that the D9090 is laid out as: 918tracks (1-918), 32 sectors
>>(0-31). etc.

>Model					D9090		D9060
>heads per drive				6			4
>formatted storage
>capacity per unit		7,47Mb		4,98Mb

>cylinders(tracks)		153			153
>sectors/cylinders		128			192
>sectors per track		32			32
>blocks per sector		256			256

I'd seen this info, and hence my confusion.. the work "cylinders" in two
lines. By "logical" I was refering to what the programmer would use when
they sent a U1 or U2 command. Come to think of it... do these drives support
U1, U2 or do they need B-R and B-W???

>> Can someone confirm this, and also the layouts of the other drives
>> of this era?

>Which era?  The era of 5MB-10MB 5.25" drives?  The entire list of

I was thinking this era in Commodore's history... for example the CBM 8250
etc rather than specific mechanisms.

Many thanks, Nick


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Your Engineering Solutions Provider
http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/engineeringServices/engServices.htm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
PLEASE TAKE NOTE:

The contents of this email (including any attachments) may be
privileged and confidential. Any unauthorised use of the contents
is expressly prohibited. If you have received this email in error,
please advise us immediately (you can contact us by telephone
on +61 8 9441 2311 by reverse charge) and then permanently
delete this email together with any attachments. We appreciate
your co-operation.

Whilst Orbital endeavours to take reasonable care to ensure
that this email and any attachments are free from viruses or other
defects, Orbital does not represent or warrant that such is explicitly
the case

(C) 2003: Orbital Engine Company (Australia) PTY LTD and its
affiliates



       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list

Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.