[ Note: This mail was converted from HTML to text by majordomo. Formatting might be poor. ] Thanks, Anders .... I had a look at this Wikipedia article ..... That, I am certain that it's not "theorically" complex to add numerous HDD to a 9090. How many ? 4 - May be 8 ... I won't try by myself >CONNECTING 2 HARD DRIVES TO THE ONE (SASI) CONTROLLER > >Capable of managing 2 x MFM Hard drive mechanisms, which is communicated to the user as two >combined Directories, with one header number = 0 and the other header number = 1 Which is strange >because most Commodore drives of this era required each seperate disk Directory to be called >individually by a command LOAD"$",8,0 and LOAD"$",8,1 for the two drives that reside in Device 8. As a >result it looks like the DOS was never fully completed by Commodore, which is evident when you save to >the hard drive only to find that the two directories overlap for the one device and the number of blocks >free is only displayed as if only one Hard drive is in use. Hum ??? It started well but I am affraid that the writer doesn't had used the classic commodore dual floppy drives - to have a look at drive 0's directory, type load "0:$",8 and, for drive 1's directory, it's load "1:$",8 .... the last ,0 or ,1 means the load address that has nothing to do with it ! Regards ----- Message d'origine ----- De: Anders Carlsson Date: Lundi, Avril 27, 2009 16:43 Objet: Re: Re: 90x0, was: New user Ā: email@example.com > Hervé asked: > > > - What was original retail price ? > > This Wikipedia user notes he found a Commodore price list from > September > 1983. Back then, the D9060 was listed at 1995 GBP, a D9090 at 2495 > GBP. I > don't know when those hard drives originally were released, some > time in > 1982? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Suenarmy > > So if you compare the two, the 9090 has 50% more capacity but a > list price > only 25% higher. It appears this ratio still is more or less valid. > > Best regards > > -- > Anders Carlsson > > > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2009-04-27 17:12:19
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.