Hola Levente et al., > I guess I have more to talk about the 1541 emulation and the disk image > handler part of the HDD controller. > > > - We're so stupid, but we expect the HDD a lot of 1541 compatible > features. > > - No surprise, the 1541's own filesystem is too small, simply unable to > use as main filesystem for a HDD. The useability of the HDD and it's > filesystem is much more serious than the need to be compatible with the > 1541. I'm still a bit unclear on the purpose of this scheme. While I certainly appreciate the technical merits, my question relates to the practical uses of the scheme. So, let's say that after a long development time it works 100% perfectly: 1) Who is going to use it? 2) What are they going to use it for? > From the other hand, if we don't follow the structure of the 1541 > filesystem, we'll definitely lose compatibility with most of 1541 > dependent software. That's it. But it's obvious. > > - The solution is, to use regular disk images. How, and why to do this? What kind of software are we talking about here? Games are all I can think of that need a disk image. 1) What advantage is gained over just using a floppy? 2) What percentage of non-emulator users are dedicated gamers? > - No surprise, the HDD's own filesystem must have subdirs. Since our > OS know what CD, MD and others are about, we have an option to treat > anything like a subdirectory. For what it's worth, CMD devices rather let you format different partitions in different ways (1541, 1581, native mode, etc.). So it's similar to what you describe, but uses "CP" instead of "CD" (and of course uses a physical partition instead of a disk image). > - When speaking of disk images, one thinks 1541 is good but there are a > lot of other floppy drives too, all with the appropriate image formats. > What about these? Hmmm, which drives are you referring to? For myself, I'm trying to imagine what I would use these features, or more generally this hard drive, for, given what I currently use my 64 for. I ask the above questions because a) I don't know the answers :), and b) because there are a number of technically brilliant programs for the 64 which are effectively useless, or at least not used. This in general happens because they are either too difficult to use, too specialized, or address problems which simply aren't of much concern on the 64. I find that while there's great personal satisfaction in writing a program, it's an awful lot nicer if the program actually gets used by others (alternatively, it's rather depressing to know I'm the only person who finds the program worth using!). -Steve - This message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list. To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe | mail email@example.com.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.1.