Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules and Etiquette

Our mission ...

This forum is part of our mission to promote the preservation of vintage computers through education and outreach. (In real life we also run events and have a museum.) We encourage you to join us, participate, share your knowledge, and enjoy.

This forum has been around in this format for over 15 years. These rules and guidelines help us maintain a healthy and active community, and we moderate the forum to keep things on track. Please familiarize yourself with these rules and guidelines.


Rule 1: Remain civil and respectful

There are several hundred people who actively participate here. People come from all different backgrounds and will have different ways of seeing things. You will not agree with everything you read here. Back-and-forth discussions are fine but do not cross the line into rude or disrespectful behavior.

Conduct yourself as you would at any other place where people come together in person to discuss their hobby. If you wouldn't say something to somebody in person, then you probably should not be writing it here.

This should be obvious but, just in case: profanity, threats, slurs against any group (sexual, racial, gender, etc.) will not be tolerated.


Rule 2: Stay close to the original topic being discussed
  • If you are starting a new thread choose a reasonable sub-forum to start your thread. (If you choose incorrectly don't worry, we can fix that.)
  • If you are responding to a thread, stay on topic - the original poster was trying to achieve something. You can always start a new thread instead of potentially "hijacking" an existing thread.



Rule 3: Contribute something meaningful

To put things in engineering terms, we value a high signal to noise ratio. Coming here should not be a waste of time.
  • This is not a chat room. If you are taking less than 30 seconds to make a post then you are probably doing something wrong. A post should be on topic, clear, and contribute something meaningful to the discussion. If people read your posts and feel that their time as been wasted, they will stop reading your posts. Worse yet, they will stop visiting and we'll lose their experience and contributions.
  • Do not bump threads.
  • Do not "necro-post" unless you are following up to a specific person on a specific thread. And even then, that person may have moved on. Just start a new thread for your related topic.
  • Use the Private Message system for posts that are targeted at a specific person.


Rule 4: "PM Sent!" messages (or, how to use the Private Message system)

This forum has a private message feature that we want people to use for messages that are not of general interest to other members.

In short, if you are going to reply to a thread and that reply is targeted to a specific individual and not of interest to anybody else (either now or in the future) then send a private message instead.

Here are some obvious examples of when you should not reply to a thread and use the PM system instead:
  • "PM Sent!": Do not tell the rest of us that you sent a PM ... the forum software will tell the other person that they have a PM waiting.
  • "How much is shipping to ....": This is a very specific and directed question that is not of interest to anybody else.


Why do we have this policy? Sending a "PM Sent!" type message basically wastes everybody else's time by making them having to scroll past a post in a thread that looks to be updated, when the update is not meaningful. And the person you are sending the PM to will be notified by the forum software that they have a message waiting for them. Look up at the top near the right edge where it says 'Notifications' ... if you have a PM waiting, it will tell you there.

Rule 5: Copyright and other legal issues

We are here to discuss vintage computing, so discussing software, books, and other intellectual property that is on-topic is fine. We don't want people using these forums to discuss or enable copyright violations or other things that are against the law; whether you agree with the law or not is irrelevant. Do not use our resources for something that is legally or morally questionable.

Our discussions here generally fall under "fair use." Telling people how to pirate a software title is an example of something that is not allowable here.


Reporting problematic posts

If you see spam, a wildly off-topic post, or something abusive or illegal please report the thread by clicking on the "Report Post" icon. (It looks like an exclamation point in a triangle and it is available under every post.) This send a notification to all of the moderators, so somebody will see it and deal with it.

If you are unsure you may consider sending a private message to a moderator instead.


New user moderation

New users are directly moderated so that we can weed spammers out early. This means that for your first 10 posts you will have some delay before they are seen. We understand this can be disruptive to the flow of conversation and we try to keep up with our new user moderation duties to avoid undue inconvenience. Please do not make duplicate posts, extra posts to bump your post count, or ask the moderators to expedite this process; 10 moderated posts will go by quickly.

New users also have a smaller personal message inbox limit and are rate limited when sending PMs to other users.


Other suggestions
  • Use Google, books, or other definitive sources. There is a lot of information out there.
  • Don't make people guess at what you are trying to say; we are not mind readers. Be clear and concise.
  • Spelling and grammar are not rated, but they do make a post easier to read.
See more
See less

New TestFDC Results Registry

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    New TestFDC Results Registry

    I'd been trying to reach Dave Dunfield with new TestFDC results since apparently August (forum thread) with no results. So, I wrote a new TestFDC registry into my site:

    https://services.theglitchworks.net/ng/testfdc_results

    This registry currently includes Dave's last registry update from 2007. There's now a form for entering your results, you can find it as a link from the registry, or here:

    https://services.theglitchworks.net/...dc_results/new

    Result submissions have to be manually approved currently so that the registry doesn't get spammed. Text export forthcoming. Any suggestions welcome!

    Moderators, if someone wants to sticky this (here or in other forums), I think this would be a valuable resource for anyone wanting to use ImageDisk on non-PC formats.
    Check out The Glitch Works | My Retro Projects | Vintage Computer Services | Glitch Works Tindie Store -- Vintage Computer Kits and More

    #2
    Glitch, it's been my experience that FM-compatible and even 128-byte MFM-capable FDCs on later-model P3->AMD2+ motherboards have proliferated considerably. For example, my FIC KC-19+ P3 motherboard passes all (including 128 byte MFM) tests quite nicely and my Advantech P4 board passes all but the 128-byte MFM test. I've got several later motherboards that I haven't bothered to test, but doubt that they'll flunk the FM test.

    Oddly, most of the P1 motherboards that I have flunk the FM test. So older doesn't mean better.

    So your list, were it exhaustive, might be very long, indeed.
    Reach me: vcfblackhole _at_ protonmail dot com.

    Comment


      #3
      Thanks for creating this new list. I'll make a note to dig up the results of a few additional systems I tested. As machines with real FDCs become harder to find, it will become more valuable to have some idea it the machine will work or not first.

      One might expect devices like the Kryoflux or SuperCard Pro to take the place of an FDC, but I have run in to so many problems trying to use these for inter-operation that I think real FDC "tweeners" will need to stick around for a while longer.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Chuck(G) View Post
        Glitch, it's been my experience that FM-compatible and even 128-byte MFM-capable FDCs on later-model P3->AMD2+ motherboards have proliferated considerably.
        Huh, interesting! I'll have to test a few of mine that have floppy controllers.
        Check out The Glitch Works | My Retro Projects | Vintage Computer Services | Glitch Works Tindie Store -- Vintage Computer Kits and More

        Comment


          #5
          I'm ready to submit a few new results, but there's a bug in TESTFDC 1.18 that affects my tests.

          That's the high-density 128-byte MFM sector test run on a 3.5" drive. All of my tests show "fail" even though I can, using my own code, format write and read back 128 byte sectors at 500Kbps. Is there a different version that I should be using? Interestingly, the 250Kbps MFM 128-byte tests pass. Is perhaps the gap being miscalculated?
          Reach me: vcfblackhole _at_ protonmail dot com.

          Comment


            #6
            Interesting. I'm fairly sure I used that same version to test a couple of FDCs a while back that passed all tests. (I have yet to dig those out and re-test). I wonder what is different? Hmmm, if it were incorrectly marking just some, but not all, chips as failed when they really should pass, then nobody would have noticed.

            Chuck, does *ImageDisk* read/write/format 128-byte sectors OK on the chip in question? Of course YOUR code would succeed where other failed.

            Comment


              #7
              I've verified the bug. I created a dummy CP/M format with 48x128 byte sectors on each track, two sides, 80 cylinders on a DSHD 3.5 floppy. I copied files from the Win98 /WINDOWS/COMMAND directory--lots of stuff there.

              IMD could read the disk and create an image. It could then correctly write the image back to disk (hint: use interleave 2:1 if you don't want to grow old waiting for the process). Here's the image file--it's rar-compressed

              Using the same floppy, as target, I get the following results from testfdc 1.18:

              Code:
              Report on FDC capabilities, issued 18/01/2018 21:48:56:
              Single-Density at 250 kbps ............................ Not tested
              Single-Density at 300 kbps ............................ Not tested
              Single-Density at 500 kbps ............................ Not tested
              Double-Density at 250 kbps ............................ Not tested
              Double-Density at 300 kbps ............................ Not tested
              Double-Density at 500 kbps ............................ Not tested
              Double-Density at 250 kbps / 128 byte sectors ......... Passed
              Double-Density at 300 kbps / 128 byte sectors ......... Not tested
              Double-Density at 500 kbps / 128 byte sectors ......... Failed
              So, if you see a result where the 128 MFM test passes at 250 Kbps, but fails at 500 Kbps, disregard the failure.
              Reach me: vcfblackhole _at_ protonmail dot com.

              Comment


                #8
                Do we also want results for low-density controllers? I would assume just put "N-not tested" for the 300kbps and 500kbps tests?

                I noticed that the low-density controller card with the Tava system I mentioned the other day actually supports FM.

                BTW, is 128-byte sector MFM support supposed to work at all on earlier/low density chips? I noticed even an original IBM PC/XT FDC fails that test. Funny thing is since it does not verify what it writes, Imagedisk will happily format and write an image with a few 128-byte MFM 250kbps (low density) sectors, but it can not read it back.

                Comment


                  #9
                  The writing bit often doesn't hard fail (as far as the software is concerned) but the actual data written to the disk will be corrupt, that's part of the point in running TestFDC. I've had a bunch of machines that pass on the write section of TestFDC but die on the read/verify bits.
                  Check out The Glitch Works | My Retro Projects | Vintage Computer Services | Glitch Works Tindie Store -- Vintage Computer Kits and More

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Ok, starting to compile a list to send in, and just a few questions and observations:

                    For "class", the entry page refers to the physical form such as AT/ATX/ISA but the list uses CPU type to indicate motherboards. Is physical form really preferred? And what about proprietary motherboard form factors?

                    It might be a good idea to add a disclaimer stating that results from a particular product model may vary depending on the FDC chip. This is especially true of the AHA15xx cards that may use either Intel or NSC chips.

                    For newer motherboards with integrated FDCs, I suspect most just would submit "?" as FDC chip, but after thinking about it, I think ideally this should be the I/O chip (For example, IT8720F), rather than the motherboard's chip set unless perhaps it is built in to the chip set. Usually the only way to get that is to look at the motherboard.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by glitch View Post
                      I'd been trying to reach Dave Dunfield with new TestFDC results since apparently August (forum thread) with no results. So, I wrote a new TestFDC registry into my site:

                      https://services.theglitchworks.net/ng/testfdc_results
                      I get a 404 error. Is your site still up?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        That list never got updated anyway. I had submitted some new entries and as I recall the never got added.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by TomL_12953 View Post
                          I get a 404 error. Is your site still up?
                          Sorry, moved to a new server and didn't update the redirect rules for that one. Here's the new link:

                          https://services.glitchworks.net/ng/testfdc_results

                          Originally posted by SomeGuy View Post
                          That list never got updated anyway. I had submitted some new entries and as I recall the never got added.
                          It got updated and something happened to the DB, I still have all of the submissions, I just need to go back through and approve them/process the notes sections.
                          Check out The Glitch Works | My Retro Projects | Vintage Computer Services | Glitch Works Tindie Store -- Vintage Computer Kits and More

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Ok, great. If adding new stuff will be working in the future, perhaps I'll get off my ass and test a few more things.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              All submitted entries have been approved.
                              Check out The Glitch Works | My Retro Projects | Vintage Computer Services | Glitch Works Tindie Store -- Vintage Computer Kits and More

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X