Conference hydra::amiga_v1

    
    The Amiga is capable of reading and writing MS-Dos/ST compatible
    disks.  When the first IBM Transformer program came out over two
    years ago, I was amazed that the standard Amiga floppy would format
    a 720K DSDD IBM disk under MS-Dos 2.11 or later.
    
    Mechanically, the drives are probably the same.  I know the tracks/inch
    are the same, as are the number of tracks.  The spindle RPM is also the
    same.   I can't imagine what Workbench has to do with anything.
           
    Ed.
     

Re: .1

Although the Amiga hardware is capable of writing and reading MS/DOS
disks, they don't get read unless you have special software to do the
job (be the special software MS/DOS running under the Transformer or
DOS-2-DOS running under AmigaDOS).

Re: .0

Like Ed, I am stumped as to why loading Workbench makes any difference.

    How does this relate to the PCTOOLS stuff shipped on my workbench
    disk?  Is that only for 5 �" disks?
    Tom

    re: .3
    
    I believe PCTOOLS can't read 3.5" disks, something about not being
    able to get the step size down small enough to do it using the
    trackdisk.device.  I suspect DOS-2-DOS and the Transformer bypass
    that with their own handlers.
    

    re: .0
    
    Sounds like they have some really strange formatting on it.  Does
    dual mean that it has separate ST and Amiga sections?  Or that
    the same programs can be accessed from either computer?
    
    Just to clarify the description:
    1. boot up into the CLI
    2. insert disk
    3. what does INFO show about it?
    4. LOADWB
    5. what does INFO show about it?
    
    How about a review?  Do they say why they are doing a dual magazine?
    
    -dave

    Dual format means separate sections, i.e. I can only "see" the Amiga
    programs, (and presumably ST owners can only see the ST programs.)
    
�    1. boot up into the CLI
    OK. (I don't have LOADWB in s/startup-sequence)
�    2. insert disk
    OK.
�    3. what does INFO show about it?
    "NOT A DOS DISK" (or words to that effect.)
�    4. LOADWB
    OK.
�    5. what does INFO show about it?
    
    DF1: etc.etc.  100% etc.etc. Format1 [mounted] 
    
    i.e. the normal INFO line, except that it is shown to be 100% full
    even though there is only some 700 or so blocks worth of files.
    
    RE: review, I'd rather not review it yet, as this was the very first
    issue and I feel it's fairer to let it 'settle down' and develop
    a style before reviewing it. We have been quite lucky here recently
    as we've had now three new Amiga magazines issued in the last couple
    of months, "Your Amiga", "Amiga Computing", and now "ST Amiga Format".
    I'll leave it another couple of months and post a note reviewing
    all three.
    
    Why a dual magazine ? They don't really say why (other than "The
    ST and Amiga are the leading state-of-the-art....... etc.") but
    reading between the lines I would guess that it perhaps used to
    be an ST only magazine and it changed its name when it decided to
    adopt the Amiga too.
    
    				Alan T.
    
    (still puzzled why I need to LOADWB to recognise the disk.)

	could you tell us what's on the disk anyway ?
Iv

Re: .6

>    Why a dual magazine ? They don't really say why (other than "The
>    ST and Amiga are the leading state-of-the-art....... etc.") but

I hear that the same company is producing a new magazine called
"Israeli and Palestinian."

The got the idea for the above mentioned magazine (along with the Amiga
and ST magazine) from their Irish flagship publication, "Catholic and
Protestant."

:-)

�< Note 1504.7 by YIPPEE::GOULNIK "OogaboogaBox type" >
�                            -< how much of what ? >-
�
�
�	could you tell us what's on the disk anyway ?
�Iv
    
    It only contained 4 programs for the Ami, VirusX (the latest version),
    Othello (same as on Fish #90), Drunken Mouse (a screen hack) and the
    Interceptor demo. Remember that this isn't a disk based magazine,
    just a normal glossy computer magazine that happens to supply a
    disk too - cost �2.50.
    
    					Alan T.

    re: .8
    
    I still go to ABACUS (local Atari group) meetings.  A lot
    of the old flames are kept alive by out-of-date info or old
    rumors.  A dual magazine could help educate those poor, misguided
    souls who bought an ST :-)
    
    Besides, the rumor describing the Atari EST makes it sound very
    similar to the Amiga 500.
    
    -dave

    Magazines which cover both Amiga and Atari (as well as Sinclair
    QL) are no big deal in Germany.  For instance, an issue of _68000'er_
    I picked up on vacation was about evenly divided in coverage of
    the three brands.  Makes you wonder a bit about the divisions in
    the American microcomputer press, especially no that _Byte_ has
    narrowed its coverage.
    
    Wes

    
    Yeah, Byte has really been ignoring Amiga and Atari lately.  The
    latest issue has about a huge article on multitasking.  The Amiga
    merits a few paragraphs.   There's more on MultiFinder than on Amiga's
    Exec.  How can this be fair?  MultiFinder is a pretty poor product
    in my opinion.  This is no reflection on the Mac or anything, it's
    just that MultiFinder isn't in the same universe as Exec.
    

    Byte prints what makes them the most money.  If you don't think
    they're in it for anything else, just check the advertisement to
    article ratio.
    
    The biggest audience for making money they can find is 1MB PeeCees,
    and only recently, MacIntosh.  Printing anything that falls outside
    of those boundaries will generally be regarded as noise by their
    readers.  Most 1BM PeeCee types I've known don't even acknowledge
    conversations that aren't 8086 based.
    
    Does anyone recall when the PeeCee first came out?  Byte slathered
    so much drool on the machine that it was hard to hold onto their
    rag.  They so much as said that 1BM invented the personal computer
    and anything that had happened in the several preceeding years was
    just a cheap imitation before the fact.  With that sort of attitude,
    are you really expecting objectivity?

    
    Only two US magazines cover both the Amiga & the ST.  Computer Shopper
    and Compute!.  Compute has become glossy & minimal technical content
    magazine (they claim the new home market has a need for that kind
    of magazine, since the "new generation" of home users have no interest
    in programming).
    
    The August issue of Compute! has a good interview with Max Toy, CEO
    of Commodore.  It mentions a couple thing I haven't seen before.
    
    1. A couple years ago, CBM's sales were 80% consumer, 20% business.
       Now they are 60% consumer, 40% business.
    
    2. I don't know if this was a comment about Atari's XE Game System...
       but he says "We will continue to position the 64 and 128 as
       computers first, as an entertainment system second"
    
    3. in 1987, CBM was the largest personal computer company in the
       world, as far as number of units.
    
    4. "As Max Toy himself is fond of pointing out, Commodore introduced
        the first true multitasking computer.  It's only natural that
        a natural multitasker take the company's helm."
    
    -dave

    re: .14--``...Commodore introduced the first true multitasking
    computer...''.
    
    That simply isn't true.  The Burroughs B5000, introduced in the
    early 60s, was a multitasking computer, and I'm not even sure it
    was the first.
        John Sauter

    re: .15
    
    I just checked, it really does say that in the intro.  Consider
    the source, Compute! lately isn't noted for technical accuracy.
    CBM's claim is that it shipped the first native multitasking
    personal business computer.  An interesting claim, given that
    they get to define what a "personal business computer" is.
    
    Another Compute! "gem" is in the hints & tips section:
    Question: "I have recently been looking to buy a new computer.
       I was thinking about getting the Amiga 500, until I heard that it
       is prone to crashing without any apparent reason.  Is there any
       truth to this?"
    Answer: "When an Amiga crashes, it always has a good reason"
       Then it goes into a discussion on ill behaved programs assuming
       that a resource request is always granted.  And finishes with:
       "The best way to keep an Amiga from crashing is to buy more RAM.
       Most Amigas are now sold with one megabyte of memory - enough
       to run several programs safely at the same time.  If you have
       less memory, consider upgrading"
    
    Maybe they are spreading their limited technical expertise a little
    too thin... I don't know which is worse, the original rumor or
    the last part of the answer.
    
    -Dave

    To reply to one of the original questions here, the disks are (now
    were) Amiga format on one side, ST the other.
    
    -Rog
    
    (who's still trying to find out about disk formats in general - see
    note #4372)
    

    Huh?  How would one access the "other" side?  3.5 inch floppies can't
    be inserted into the drive upside down.  This was easy to do with C64
    and 8-bit Atari stuff on 5.25 inch media, but not very practical here.
    
    More likely there is some boot block "magic" to access the data on
    either machine.  I recall that Amiga Dungeon Master disks are basically
    in ST format with appropriate handler code loaded at boot time.

>   <<< Note 1504.18 by BOMBE::MOORE "Amiga: Real computing on a PC budget" >>>
>
>    Huh?  How would one access the "other" side?  3.5 inch floppies can't
>    be inserted into the drive upside down.  This was easy to do with C64
>    and 8-bit Atari stuff on 5.25 inch media, but not very practical here.
>    
>    More likely there is some boot block "magic" to access the data on
>    either machine.  I recall that Amiga Dungeon Master disks are basically
>    in ST format with appropriate handler code loaded at boot time.


Well, the boot block is just block 0 (and 1?) so it's at head 0 cylinder 0.

Amiga boot ROMS would only read this one block. SO if you insert it right
side up, you get Amiga bootblock under head 0, cyl 0, insert  upside  down
and you get Atari boot block at head 0 cyl 0.

Once booted, the application does it's own floppy I/O  making sure
to only read blocks on head 0.

Of course, this is just a guess...

john

    Re: -.1
>Well, the boot block is just block 0 (and 1?) so it's at head 0 cylinder 0.

>Amiga boot ROMS would only read this one block. SO if you insert it right
>side up, you get Amiga bootblock under head 0, cyl 0, insert  upside  down
>and you get Atari boot block at head 0 cyl 0.

>Once booted, the application does it's own floppy I/O  making sure
>to only read blocks on head 0.

>Of course, this is just a guess...

    Hope you intended a lot of smiley faces on this one John. We'll leave
    it to the Atari users to stuff floppies upside down in their drives :-).
    Anyone who tries this is certainly in for a lot of grief, due to the
    physical interaction between the drive, the little metal slider and the
    spindle. I get enough gronking in df0: when the disks are inserted
    right side up!

    -Dom

I think 18 has the right of it. I have Starglider II, which states explicitly
that a run-time determination is used to access the disk's Amiga or Atari
boot blocks. I don't see how upside-down disks could *possibly* be read, as the
"read-only" status is determined *physically,* not magnetically. The switch is
in only one place, after all!

Cheers,
	Bob

And as .-2 points out, the physical case on a 3.5" floppy prevents it
from working upside down...  :-)

john