sjvn01

The History of the Floppy Disk

by sjvn01 on ‎27-08-2012 08:00 AM - last edited on ‎27-08-2012 08:14 AM by Administrator

In the fall of 1977, I experimented with a newfangled PC, a Radio Shack TRS-80. For data storage it used—I kid you not—a cassette tape player. Tape had a long history with computing; I had used the IBM 2420 9-track tape system on IBM 360/370 mainframes to load software and to back-up data. Magnetic tape was common for storage in pre-personal computing days, but it had two main annoyances: it held tiny amounts of data, and it was slower than a slug on a cold spring morning. There had to be something better, for those of us excited about technology. And there was: the floppy disk.

Floppy_disk.jpg

Welcome to the floppy disk family: 8”, 5.25” and 3.5”

In the mid-70s I had heard about floppy drives, but they were expensive, exotic equipment. I didn't know that IBM had decided as early as 1967 that tape-drives, while fine for back-ups, simply weren't good enough to load software on mainframes. So it was that Alan Shugart assigned David L. Noble to lead the development of “a reliable and inexpensive system for loading microcode into the IBM System/370 mainframes using a process called Initial Control Program Load (ICPL).” From this project came the first 8-inch floppy disk.

Oh yes, before the 5.25-inch drives you remember were the 8-inch floppy. By 1978 I was using them on mainframes; later I would use them on Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) dedicated cataloging PCs.

The 8-inch drive began to show up in 1971. Since they enabled developers and users to stop using the dreaded paper tape (which were easy to fold, spindle, and mutilate, not to mention to pirate) and the loathed IBM 5081 punch card. Everyone who had ever twisted a some tape or—the horror!—dropped a deck of Hollerith cards was happy to adopt 8-inch drives.

ibm-punchcard.gif

Before floppy drives, we often had to enter data using punch cards.

Besides, the early single-sided 8-inch floppy could hold the data of up to 3,000 punch cards, or 80K to you. I know that's nothing today — this article uses up 66K with the text alone – but then it was a big deal.

Some early model microcomputers, such as the Xerox 820 and Xerox Alto, used 8-inch drives, but these first generation floppies never broke through to the larger consumer market. That honor would go to the next generation of the floppy: the 5.25 inch model.

By 1972, Shugart had left IBM and founded his own company, Shugart Associates. In 1975, Wang, which at the time owned the then big-time dedicated word processor market, approached Shugart about creating a computer that would fit on top of a desk. To do that, Wang needed a smaller, cheaper floppy disk.

According to Don Massaro (PDF link), another IBMer who followed Shugart to the new business, Wang’s founder Charles Wang said, “I want to come out with a much lower-end word processor. It has to be much lower cost and I can't afford to pay you $200 for your 8" floppy; I need a $100 floppy.”

So, Shugart and company started working on it. According to Massaro, “We designed the 5 1/4" floppy drive in terms of the overall design, what it should look like, in a car driving up to Herkimer, New York to visit Mohawk Data Systems.” The design team stopped at a stationery store to buy cardboard while trying to figure out what size the diskette should be. “It's real simple, the reason why it was 5¼,” he said. “5 1/4 was the smallest diskette that you could make that would not fit in your pocket. We didn't want to put it in a pocket because we didn't want it bent, okay?”

Shugart also designed the diskette to be that size because an analysis of the cassette tape drives and their bays in microcomputers showed that a 5.25” drive was as big as you could fit into the PCs of the day.

According to another story from Jimmy Adkisson, a Shugart engineer, “Jim Adkisson and Don Massaro were discussing the proposed drive's size with Wang. The trio just happened to be doing their discussing at a bar. An Wang motioned to a drink napkin and stated 'about that size' which happened to be 5 1/4-inches wide.”

Wang wasn’t the most important element in the success of the 5.25-inch floppy. George Sollman, another Shugart engineer, took an early model of the 5.25” drive to a Home Brew Computer Club meeting. “The following Wednesday or so, Don came to my office and said, 'There's a bum in the lobby,’” Sollman says. “‘And, in marketing, you're in charge of cleaning up the lobby. Would you get the bum out of the lobby?’ So I went out to the lobby and this guy is sitting there with holes in both knees. He really needed a shower in a bad way but he had the most dark, intense eyes and he said, 'I've got this thing we can build.'”

The bum's name was Steve Jobs and the “thing” was the Apple II.

Apple had also used cassette drives for its first computers. Jobs knew his computers also needed a smaller, cheaper, and better portable data storage system. In late 1977, the Apple II was made available with optional 5.25” floppy drives manufactured by Shugart. One drive ordinarily held programs, while the other could be used to store your data. (Otherwise, you had to swap floppies back-and-forth when you needed to save a file.)

Apple_II.png

The PC that made floppy disks a success: 1977's Apple II

The floppy disk seems so simple now, but it changed everything. As IBM's history of the floppy disk states, this was a big advance in user-friendliness. “But perhaps the greatest impact of the floppy wasn’t on individuals, but on the nature and structure of the IT industry. Up until the late 1970s, most software applications for tasks such as word processing and accounting were written by the personal computer owners themselves. But thanks to the floppy, companies could write programs, put them on the disks, and sell them through the mail or in stores. 'It made it possible to have a software industry,' says Lee Felsenstein, a pioneer of the PC industry who designed the Osborne 1, the first mass-produced portable computer. Before networks became widely available for PCs, people used floppies to share programs and data with each other—calling it the 'sneakernet.'”

In short, it was the floppy disk that turned microcomputers into personal computers.

Floppy_Disk_Drives.jpg

 Which of these drives did you own?

The success of the Apple II made the 5.25” drive the industry standard. The vast majority of CP/M-80 PCs, from the late 70s to early 80s, used this size floppy drive. When the first IBM PC arrived in 1981 you had your choice of one or two 160 kilobyte (K – yes, just one K) floppy drives.

Throughout the early 80s, the floppy drive became the portable storage format. (Tape quickly was relegated to business back-ups.) At first, the floppy disk drives were only built with one read/write head, but another set of heads were quickly incorporated. This meant that when the IBM XT PC arrived in 1983, double-sided floppies could hold up to 360K of data.

There were some bumps along the road to PC floppy drive compatibility. Some companies, such as DEC with its DEC Rainbow, introduced its own non-compatible 5.25” floppy drives. They were single-sided but with twice the density, and in 1983 a single box of 10 disks cost $45 – twice the price of the standard disks.

In the end, though, market forces kept the various non-compatible disk formats from splitting the PC market into separate blocks. (How the data was stored was another issue, however. Data stored on a CP/M system was unreadable on a PC-DOS drive, for examples, so dedicated applications like Media Master promised to convert data from one format to another.)

That left lots of room for innovation within the floppy drive mainstream. In 1984, IBM introduced the IBM Advanced Technology (AT) computer. This model came with a high-density 5.25-inch drive, which could handle disks that could up hold up to 1.2MB of data.

A variety of other floppy drives and disk formats were tried. These included 2.0, 2.5, 2.8, 3.0, 3.25, and 4.0 inch formats. Most quickly died off, but one, the 3.5” size – introduced by Sony in 1980 – proved to be a winner.

The 3.5 disk didn't really take off until 1982. Then, the Microfloppy Industry Committee approved a variation of the Sony design and the “new” 3.5” drive was quickly adopted by Apple for the Macintosh, by Commodore for the Amiga, and by Atari for its Atari ST PC. The mainstream PC market soon followed and by 1988, the more durable 3.5” disks outsold the 5.25” floppy disks. (During the transition, however, most of us configured our PCs to have both a 3.5” drive and a 5.25” drive, in addition to the by-now-ubiquitous hard disks. Still, most of us eventually ran into at least one situation in which we had a file on a 5.25” disk and no floppy drive to read it on.)

IAOL-Disk.jpg

 The one 3.5” diskette that everyone met at one time or another: An AOL install disk.

The first 3.5” disks could only hold 720K. But they soon became popular because of the more convenient pocket-size format and their somewhat-sturdier construction (if you rolled an office chair over one of these, you had a chance that the data might survive). Another variation of the drive, using Modified Frequency Modulation (MFM) encoding, pushed 3.5” diskettes storage up to 1.44Mbs in IBM's PS/2 and Apple's Mac IIx computers in the mid to late 1980s.

By then, though floppy drives would continue to evolve, other portable technologies began to surpass them.

In 1991, Jobs introduced the extended-density (ED) 3.5” floppy on his NeXT computer line. These could hold up to 2.8MBs. But it wasn't enough. A variety of other portable formats that could store more data came along, such as magneto-optical drives and Iomega's Zip drive, and they started pushing floppies out of business.

The real floppy killers, though, were read-writable CDs, DVDs, and, the final nail in the coffin: USB flash drives. Today, a 64GB flash drive can hold more data than every floppy disk I've ever owned all rolled together.

Apple prospered the most from the floppy drive but ironically was the first to abandon it as read-writable CDs and DVDs took over. The 1998 iMac was the first consumer computer to ship without any floppy drive.

However, the floppy drive took more than a decade to die. Sony, which at the end owned 70% of what was left of the market, announced in 2010 that it was stopping the manufacture of 3.5” diskettes.

Today, you can still buy new 1.44MB floppy drives and floppy disks, but for the other formats you need to look to eBay or yard sales. If you really want a new 3.5” drive or disks, I'd get them sooner than later. Their day is almost done.

But, as they disappear even from memory, we should strive to remember just how vitally important floppy disks were in their day. Without them, our current computer world simply could not exist. Before the Internet was open to the public, it was floppy disks that let us create and trade programs and files. They really were what put the personal in “personal computing.”

See also:

Comments
by Administrator on ‎27-08-2012 09:07 AM

I'm pretty sure I have a box of 3.0" floppies up in my roofspace. I dare say that, even if I still had the Amstrad CPC they were written on with, I wouldn't be able to read them ;-)

by Administrator on ‎27-08-2012 09:25 AM

I was thinking about the backups we did with floppy disks. I clearly recall Norton Backup requiring 60 diskettes to back up my (80MB?) hard disk. Which meant, of course, that I never did it.

by Gene Mosher(anon) on ‎27-08-2012 10:57 AM

Rather amazing that you do not mention Steve Wozniak's brilliant engineering role in this.  And Steve Jobs was just a salesman on the periphery.

by Michel Godfroid(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 12:14 AM

Charles Wang is the founder of Computer Associates. Wang Laboratories' founder was Dr. An Wang ('The Doctor'). 

by Vivi Chellappa(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 01:02 AM

This is so full of inaccuracies that I don't even know where to begin
".Magnetic tape was common for storage in pre-personal computing days, but it had two main annoyances: it held tiny amounts of data, and it was slower than a slug on a cold spring morning."
Tiny amounts of data?  Magnetic tapes were commonly 2400' in length and held data at 3200 bits/inch.  That translatesd to about 90 megabytes.  Since there were 9 tracks on the tape, that is about 720 megabits of storage (1 bit being used for parity check).  Even if fully half the tape is wasted on inter-record gaps, that works out to 45 megabytes of data.Compare that to 1.44 megabytes on the final iteration of the 3.5" floppy.
Slower than a slug?  At a speed of 120 inches/second, you get a data transfer rate of  384,000 bytes/second.  The floppy, according to Wikipedia, had a maximum transfer rate of 1 million bits/second, translating to 125K bytes/second.
"I didn't know that IBM had decided as early as 1967 that tape-drives, while fine for back-ups, simply weren't good enough to load software on mainframes. So it was that Alan Shugart assigned David L. Noble to lead the development of “a reliable and inexpensive system for loading microcode into the IBM System/370 mainframes using a process called Initial Control Program Load (ICPL).” From this project came the first 8-inch floppy disk."
A tape could get lost in the vast library of tapes that a company would have.  If the microprogram could be somehow stored in  such a manner that it would never get lost, that would be one service call less for the IBM customer engineer each time someone misplaced the tape containing the microcode.  The floppy drive was built into the cabinet of the CPU and the floppy drive containg the microcode for the IBM mainframe was copied into the flopp[y disk and put inside the floppy drive.  I don't remember if it was possible to eject the media out of the floppy drive but somehow I think the user couldn't.
There were three buttons one rarely touched on the front panel (or, back side) of the IBM 360 mainframes.  The first of these is the IPL (Initial Program Load) button.  This would re-boot the computer by reloading the operating system.  The second is the IMPL (Initial Micro Program Load, not ICPL) button, which actually reloaded the instruction set that the mainframe was capable of executing into ROM from the floppy disk.  The third was the big red switch that turned the power off to the mainframe.
"According to Don Massaro (PDF link), another IBMer who followed Shugart to the new business, Wang’s founder Charles Wang said, “I want to come out with a much lower-end word processor. It has to be much lower cost and I can't afford to pay you $200 for your 8" floppy; I need a $100 floppy.”"
First of all, the founder of Wang Computers was An Wang; Charles Wang founded Computer Associates, Inc.
Even after several iterations the 5-1/4" floppy drive was being sold at $650.  Some years after the IBM PC came out - that would make it the mid-to-late-1980's - Tandon Corporation announced the first sub-$400 floppy drive.  It was the 1990s before you got to the $100 floppy drive.
Enough already!
by Adrian Pocklington(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 03:20 AM

Anyone remember the joys of installing WIN95 from its set of 28 floppies.

by j b(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 04:43 AM

@Vivi,

When floppies were introduced, 3200 bpi 9-track tape was certainly NOT a commodity item - I am not even sure that they had been introduced at that time. I've got a pile of 800 dpi 7-track tapes from 1980-81; at that time 9-track was certainly available, but quite expensive. Lots of installations were still using 7-track 800 and 1600 dpi tapes.

Besides. although tapes could be 2400 feet (and I believe even 3600 feet), most installations were timesharing, multiuser ones, where one tape typically held the data for one user, one project or even a single data set. Data encryption was not common, and you would not want your files to be available to whoever asked that reel to be mounted. So, shorter tapes (on smaller reels) were very common, like 300 or 600 ft length.

While newer tape stations could reach a peak speed of 120 in/sec, earlier and more affordable stations could be far below that speed. And more important: Those were PEAK speeds. Even if the peak speed was 384,000 bytes/sec, you couldn't read a 384 Mbyte file in a thousand seconds! (Obviously, files that large were rather on the extreme side.) "Streaming tape" came with the tape cartridges, much later, making a revolution in the backup of huge amounts of data.

But the major speed obstacle was the latency: The operator might have a list of, say, five or six tape reels requested for the two stations avialable, and those jobs using the currently mounted reels would have to complete and release the tape before another one could be mounted. Even when there were no queue, a station available, the operator had to read the request off the system console, look up the reel in the rack, carry it over to the tape station, remove the protecting rim, pull out the tape leader and insert into the hopefully automatic threading mechanism. Then the tape station could start its searching to find the start of the file requested. On a 2400' tape, that could be a time consuming affair. In a large machine room, with hundreds of tapes in each rack, and long tapes, the delay from you issued your request until the file was aviailable were rarely below half a minute, but could run into several minutes even when you did not have to wait for other users to release the station.

Stated briefly: Tape storage was completely unsuited for any kind of interactive work. They were OK for batch jobs that you could submit in the morning and pick up the output in the afternoon, but as interactive user terminals started arriving the last half of the 1970s, tape were quickly replaced by disk.

However, the major disadvantage of tape was the monumental cost of the tape stations; they could easily cost a year's salary. In comparison, floppy stations were "free". Not even when "cheap", cartridge based systems came out during the 1980s were they anywhere close to an acceptable price level for personal users and small business.

And: If you actually have the data to fill a DLT tape, the cost per (mega)byte may be competitive, if 95% of the tape is blank/unused, it is NOT. The unit cost of a tape, even today, is inconveniently high.

A curious detail: I bought my first 8" floppy in 1978. I bougth another 2 TB harddisk a few months ago. The harddisk gave me 800,000 times the capacity per absolute dollar (i.e. NOT considering inflation). The access time hasn't impoved quite as much, but I would say that it is noticable... :-)

 

 

by steelej(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 05:55 AM

A point of accuracy on the magnetic tape. I am not aware of a density of 3200 bits per inch.

The standards defined for 9 track tape (8 bits plus parity) were 800 bits per inch per track and later 1600 bits per inch. a more advanced encoding pushed this to 6250 bits per inch and a smaller interblock gap.

Usable capacity depended on the block size as the interblaock gap was 0.6 inches for 800/1600 bpi which for small bacles introduced a high overhead. By my calculation at 800 bpi the tape would hold around 18 Mbytes using 2k byte blocks and 31 Mbyte at 1600 bpi. Increasing the block size to 16k bytes gives 48 Mbytes. 6250 bpi would hold more but I never used that format so I am not familiear with the encoding overhead.

On the floppy disk front I was confused when I livein in Japan as their 3.25 inch high densite standard was 1.2 mbyte and not 1.44 Mbyte although the media was the same. My Japanese laptop (1990) would read/write 720 kbyte disketts but 1.44 Mbyte ones.

by BrianMcCue(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 06:24 AM

I apparently worked for the wrong Wang for a couple of years.  I thought An Wang signed my checks, not some dude named "Charles"...

by Dennis Drew(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 07:10 AM

I bought Altair number 57 in mid 70's. A few names to remember: Persci dual floppy drives, Don Tarbell, Gary Kildall, Adam Osborne, Byte Magazine, COMDEX, Southern California Computer Society... yikes! I manufactured S-100 computers in the 70's in the LA area. What a beginning! "Invented" the first 32k static memory board for the S-100 bus. With two of them you could meet Bill Gates goal of "All the memory you would ever need!" Bill would come down to the Southern California Computer Society club meeting and try to peddle his cassette Basic program. Bought him a hamburger or two in the 70's....

by Gavin(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 08:07 AM

Love it! I owed every one of those drives! I remember them all well, I even have a 8", 5.25" and 3.5" disk's in my collection. Love to show the 8" to the kids and have them think it's just amazing. LOL Until they learn that it can hardly hold anything and that their iPods hold thousnads of times more.

Great article!

by BrainiacV(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 08:47 AM

I remember the first 5 1/4" floppy drive we recieved at the microcomputer store I worked at copied the design of the 8" floppy drives in that it had a head loading solenoid that would click everytime the disk was being accessed.  The disk was also continuously spinning like the 8" models.

In later models they removed the solenoid and just had the head rest on the disk surface and the disk did not spin up until it was necesary.  This led to another problem, the head and opposite side pad would grip the media before the center collet would come down.  If the media was thin, the media would bend instead of forcing the disk to center.  The media would do a hula and if you formatted the disk, the tracks would not be concentric to the center hole.  You could read and write data, provided you did not remove the disk from the drive.  Your chances of reinsterting the disk and being able to read the data were about nil.

This created a short lived after market for hub re-enforcing rings to be applied to the disks to prevent this problem.  Eventually the disk manufacturers started selling disks with the rings already applied or they used stiffer media.

@Vivi Chellappa, lighten up, I agree with your corrections, but this stuff is over 30 years old.  Memories do get a little hazy after all that time.

by Chris Monk(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 09:03 AM

And most of this you can see for real at The National Museum of Computing based on Bletchley Park, UK.  We have computers from Colossus onwards and some of the biggest discs you will ever see.   Come see us.. Details here: http://www.tnmoc.org/

 

by Unix_Jim(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 09:39 AM

Still have a couple of 8" Dyson's (remember them?!) and a behemoth of a salvaged off an EpsonQX10. After reading the article I dusted them off  and assembled an old 286 motherboard (16mb ram) and it booted straight into CPM! I think we've all been had by the industry, namely the "upgrade" bug.

Re: Byute magazine - anyone want to sell me any copies they have please email me.

01001010

by David Warman(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 01:13 PM

Yes, a long time ago, memories definitely fuzz up.

 

 

My very frist job was in 1967 at Eiott Automation. They showed me onto the commissioning floor, sat me down in front of a huge Tek dual channel scope (100+ tubes IIRC), a Crown sized diazo-type schematic easel, and a 9 track tape drive, told to "fix it", and left to me own devices. Tapes I gt to know intimately, I even remember G35  on board 7 was the door switch gate, but the details of formatting escape me. Fuzz.

In 1973 I was designing an 8 bit micro for Data communications use (using standard 7400 TTL such as 74183 for the ALU:). Word came about the new Floppy drive so I built an interface for them. Data fomats were in great flux at the time, as also was sectoring (some floppies had 32 holes to mark the sectors, others had only 1), the timing, levels, etc, were all over the place. So I built a smaller 8 bitter to manage that, and was able to chose any of several competing drives by the time I was done. But the details? Gone.

Today I still have a 1995 vintage Pentium machine with a dual 5.25/3.5 single height drive for whenever I might need to recover something. But the tapes I used for backup? I will forever view tape backup as write-only. I never was able to get anything back, not even from my Quick-80's, let alone the earlier cassete systems, excet perhaps the Radio Shack data cassete drive (still have it, as ddo I have the TRS model 100, ll still working). In general, I came to realize it is necessary to archinve the complete machine, including manuals, to have any chance at all of getting anything recoverable from it. There is some MSc work I have on some data cassettes from the '80's I really actually need today, but I'm going to have to recreate it.

 

Thanks for the memories.

by weldon(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 02:27 PM

Finally, an article I can comment on! We started with a CPM machine with 2-8" 500k floppies. One for programs and one for data. Next was an MPM machine with a gigantic 40 mb hard drive and a single 5-1/4 floppy. We had a couple of suppliers who provided us with data on 8" IBM format disks. I somehow found software that would read the 8" floppy and save it to the hard disk. I actually took one of the 8" drives out of my first machine and attached it to the newer machine with a serial cable. The data came only in EBCIDIC (sp?), so I wrote a program to translate to ASCII. The second machine could save our data to the 5-1/4" floppy. It only took about 5 hours to write 5 disks. We later moved to PCs. At one time, I had a machine that could read and write 8", 5-1/4" and 3-1/2" disks. That's what you needed if you were a power user. With Mac2Dos we could even read Apple disks. Those were the good ole days.


 

by bobc4012 on ‎28-08-2012 06:41 PM

I have to agree with Vivi Chellappa about some inaccuracies. IBM had disk and drum storage back in the 50s - the IBM 650 Drum system, the IBM RAMAC 305, the development of the IBM 1401 with the 1405 RAMAC and the removable 1301 drives (and ran on 4KB H/W - yes 4KB, NOT 4MB, even on the IBM 360, they had the BOS disk operating system (ran an 8KB machine) followed by DOS (supported 16KB machines) which performed multi-tasking (three jobs running at once - batch, TP and spooling). The 360 was developed in the early 1960s and was in general use by 1965. They also had BPS (ran batch jobs on a 4K 360 without disks and TOS, the Tape version OS of DOS). The early IBM tape drives were 7-track. The 9-track tapes were developed for the IBM 360 and available back in 1964. The were 800 and 1600 bits/inch. IBM improverd the tape drives with the advent of the IBM/370 in the early 70s - 1600BPI and 6250BPI with a 1.25 MB/Sec. transfer rate. The mex. capacity on one of these tapes was an "amazing" 170MB - peanuts today, but quite an accomplishment back then. I had a Colorado Systems Jumbo 250MB (backup) tape drive on my first full-fledged PC - early 90s (with a 250MB HD).

My first PC was a Radio Shack Color Computer 1. When I had enough saved, I added a 5 1/4 floppy drive - until that time, I used a cassette recorder to load programs and store data. Yes, compared to today's devices, a cassettte recorder is slow, but back then it was a reasonable and CHEAP way of having "permanent" storage. Later, I added a second 5 1/4 floppy to the system. I also had OS/9 (from Microware) which was essentially a Unix clone. My one regret was never buying the pack for running a HD (5MB at the time), which was laying inside a clearance box for a couple of bucks.

by DD(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 08:26 PM

I used both the punchcard and 8inch floppy at University. There were 2 card punching machines in the Engineering faculty. One was for the exclusive use of the secretary and the other for students to wait in line to use. I have experienced the dreaded dropping of a deck of punch cards. It's not a very pleasnat experience trying to get your program back into order. After punching the cards you left the stacked deck bound with a rubber band in the in-box for the computer operators to run overnight. Then the next day you find you made a typo and your program didn't run so you stand in line at the punching machine and resubit for overnight processing. A very good lesson in patience.

The 3rd year electronic engineering students made components that were assembled into a working computer that 2nd years used and these contained 8inch drives. I have an 8inch floppy as a memento.

While I was at Uni, working part time in a computer store selling the first IBM PC's and Commodore 64's, etc. I saw quite a few of the disk formats come and go. I remember the frustration of the Amstrad owners who had to pay 5 to 10 times the price of a 3.5inch floppy for their proprietary 3inch format disks. I also remember buying a version of Visual Basic (maybe V3.0) and it came on 30floppies. Boy was that fun installing it!

by Mike ONeill(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 09:50 PM

Nostalgia aint what it used to be !!

The picture of the Apple ][ brought a lump to the throat , 40 Char screens , switching floppies AHHHH

 

Mike

by Peter(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 11:31 PM

Floppy was invention of Marcell Jánosi, the Hungarian constructor. When the license protection is over, he could not to renewal. Time of socialism not assist to business chance. First the IBM and later the Sony came to Hungary to study the invention, and made his own product base of Marcell Jánosi idea.

by Peter(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 11:35 PM

The picture first of ever 3" floppy at year 1974:

http://nxm.hu/nxm_okos_magyarok.html

by Tomislav(anon) on ‎28-08-2012 11:36 PM

Amiga floppy format is 880K / 1760K on same 3.5" disks.

by eraser(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 12:12 AM

Check this out, its on my Wall beside me

Museum

by majmune(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 12:45 AM

@Peter: yes, it is a sad story :( Jánosi Marcell was a great inventor

http://itcafe.hu/hir/hardversztorik_janosi_marcell_mcd_mikroflopi.html

by Jeff Kemp(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 12:48 AM

I grew up playing with a 80286 PC with two 5.25" floppy disk drives. My next computer had two 3.5" drives. I remember making regular backups of all my data on up to 10 3.5" floppy drives.

At some point I downloaded a small disk driver that changed the write format to squeeze up to 1.6MB on each 3.5" floppy drive ("not guaranteed to work on all computers"), and I started using that for my backups to decrease the number of disks required. I later came to regret this decision, however, because later, after upgrading to a newer PC running Win95, the old driver would no longer work and all my old disks were unreadable.

by Dominic(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 02:17 AM

I had loved floppies. I still have millions of them lurking in the attic. Especially Amiga games. 

I had Street Fighter 2 on the Amiga. The amount of disk changes involved was ridiculous!!!

by Mark Pentler(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 02:26 AM

I'm glad somebody mentioned the Amiga 880k format, but there was also an extra driver/program you could install on Amigas to get a frankly ridiculous 900k on a single sided disk. It was awesome!

by dirmix(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 03:14 AM

Floppy disk history update.  The 3 inch floppy drive and disk was designed and manufactured for the first time in Hungary in 1974 by BRG factory, a former socialist company. The inventor was Marcell Jánosi who was on BRG's R&D staff. Commodore was highly interested in licensing this cartidge like floppy, but ultimately the idea was rather stolen, and mass prduced worldwide by japanese tech companies.

Link with photo for Hungarian speakers:BRG MCD1 3" floppy from 1974 (Designed and Made in Hungary)

http://informatikatortenet.network.hu/blog/informatika_tortenet_klub_hirei/janosi-marcell-a-floppy-a...

by Robin(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 03:58 AM

This brought back some memories.... My first real job was being a computer operator in a datacenter using a Bull DPS-90 (later replaced by a Bull dps-9000/900) I remember 8" floppies and the horror of open reel tapes and the cursing if a read error occured when trying to restore that all important data. (R[retry], R[etry].[U]nmount... clean head of tape station, try again, clean head of another tape station try again... and finally giving up a restoring the backup from 8 hours before.

 

by Nikolay Nikolaev(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 04:19 AM

I believe on teh first picture the 8" disk reads:

ИЗОТ

СДЕЛАНО В БОЛГАРИИ

In English:

ISOT

MADE IN BULGARIA (this was in Russian)

 

"ISOT" was a big company for making floppy/hard disks in Bulgaria, which they exported to Russia and other eastern block countries. They did computers too.

Of course all these were "western" tehcnologies "borrowed" by the Bulgarian secret services through their inteligence channels on the west.

Cheers for the old times.

by Arnold Reinhold(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 04:58 AM

A couple of comments. First IBM 5081 was a form number for a particular card layout -- one without any fields printed on it. There was nothing hated about it. I spent many years programming with punch cards and they seemed natural enough at the time. In fact when I first transitioned to programming on a CRT screen with my programs stored on a 2314 style disk drive, I found the process of moving statements around within a program (using the then primitive editors) quite clumsy compared to simply moving cards in the deck. Yes, dropping a deck was a bad thing, but it does not compare to accidentally erasing your program or having a disk crash and finding your backup unreadable. 

The point of the floppy disks that were first introduced on IBM 370 mainframes was not that they "weren't good enough to load software" but that a tape drive at the time was too bulky and expensive to load (infrequently) a relatively small amount of microcode. IBM mag tapes were fine for storing programs and data for use on large and medium size computers, and Digital Equipment had a very handy, random access DECtape media. But these drives were far too expensive for personal computers. It is indeed true, as the article suggests, that floppies made the personal computer possible, and it is worth noting that Apple popularized both the 5-1/4 and 3-1/2 inch sizes and also declared their end, as they are now doing with CD and DVD drives.

One final bit of floppy trivia. For many years PCs in Europe were advertised as having 88.9 mm floppy drives, an exact conversion of 3.5 inches. What make this silly, besides the tenth of a millimeter accuracy, is the fact, easily verified, that the 3.5 inch floppies are not 3.5 inches wide. They were, from the first, made to metric standards and are exactly 90 millimeters in width. 

 

by jfc(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 05:27 AM

"Anyone remember the joys of installing WIN95 from its set of 28 floppies."

Yep. Also installing Word, Word Perfect, Excel, Autocad, Corel Draw - each of these was 8 to 12 disks. Somewhere around the office we have an external tape backup from the early 90s, it used thick chunky cassettes which stored 100MB I believe. One of my regular chores was to back up all critical files, this took about 30 minutes. It's amazing how much time was spent at work just sitting there, waiting for floppies and tapes...

by KenC(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 06:26 AM

Here's a bit of relevant trivia: FORTRAN only allow source code out to column 72 *precisely* so that columns 73-80 of a punch card can be used to store an index number.

 

That way, if you drop your source code deck, you need only to run it through a card sorter to get things back in order. If memory serves, the keypunch machine used by programmers could be configured to automatically punch auto-incrementing numbers in that column.

by Steve W(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 06:57 AM

Information is missing about the 5.25" 90K Hard Sector Floppy which proceeded the 5.25 160K Soft Sectored Floppy.

by BrainiacV(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 07:48 AM

I bought a 3.5" Flopitical (magnetic with optical positioning) drive after reading glowing reviews of the 10 MB storage you'd be able to get on them.

The units had a SCSI interface, but the articles failed to mention that the I/O speed was closer to floppy than hard drive, so reading and writing 10MB seemed glacier.

I agree with the comment about tape backups being write-only. The first bad segment in the restore process and you got the "Thank you for playing" error message that meant you could not read in the rest of your backup tapes.  I could never understand why they did not have restart points so you could skip the back segment.  Nothing was more frustrating after taking hours to back up the hard drive to multiple tapes and then getting a read error on the first tape.

An amusing note about the Apple ][ floppy drives was that they could use both hard sector and soft sector diskettes because the drives did not pay any attention to the sector holes.  Woz programmed them to use track and sector magnetic markers, rather than position and rotation the sector holes gave you.

by Warren Ernst(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 08:49 AM

Hmm. I guess I'm going to be one of those people. ;-)


I got through college with an Apple //e in the late 80's (a machine I still have, BTW), and the 5.25" floppies held 144kb of data, which was about 10 or 20 papers for me back then. Imagine, then, my surprise at the assertion that "the text alone" of this article was 66kb! That would mean only two copies of this relatively small article would have fit on a floppy with a bit of space left over. No way.

So to find out, I copy and paste the text of this article into Notepad. I delete the filenames of the images that were pasted in. Then I save the text as a ASCII text file (that is, a "text file" for you youngsters), and then get it's size.

The size of this file of the text alone: 10.6kb (10,944 bytes). That's almost 14 copies of this nearly 2000-word article on an Apple II floppy, and about a sixth the size suggested in the article.


Yeah, I know; too much time on my hands.


And thanks for the trip down memory lane.

by David Breneman(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 12:46 PM

I've got an 8" floppy disk drive from a CRDS system.  These machines also came with a 40-megabyte hard drive, and they ran a bare-bones version of Unix with half the commands missing to save space.(They were the "brain" of a robodailing system that a former employer used to sell.)  Anyway, the bedplate of this drive is a milled amuminum casting that today would probably cost over $500 to produce, even in quantity.  I bet that floppy drive couldn't be made for less than $2000 today.  In addition to increases in storage per square inch, the history of the floppy drive is also a story of the evolution of manufacturing techniques that drive the cost of everything down for everyone.

by David Warman(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 01:15 PM

Woz ignored the sector markers because they established a constant sector arc size regardless of track number. That way he could cram more data onto the outer tracks. To compensate for the difference in data density / track vs the standard way he also varied the rotational rate by track so the bits rate was maintaned constant. All Apple floppies, including Macintosh, work that way, which is why they were unreadable on PC hardware.

(IIRC of course, fuzz gets in my eyes:)

by Phil(anon) on ‎29-08-2012 04:06 PM

David Warman, the Commodore 1541 floppy drives did this too. It's funny how that idea kinda disappeared until we used it in the 90s to make HDDs bigger.

by Evan Yares(anon) on ‎30-08-2012 12:30 AM

Actually, it was Dick Morley who invented the floppy disk.  It just happened that his version of the floppy was designed to be used in a spy satellite.  Morley describes his "aha" moment with the floppy in an interview at http://www.ncms.org/Podcasts/NCMS_09_Episode5.htm

 

by Conn Clissmann(anon) on ‎30-08-2012 04:35 AM

@Steve W

I had a NorthStar Horizon computer (CP/M, S100 bus, 32K Ram) with two hard-sectored floppies. As I recall they were able to hold 120k each, as I got one of the first models with double-sided floppy disk drives (FDD). That was the only computer I owned with hard-sectored floppies.

Tandy Radio Shack sold the TRS-80 Model II with 8" floppies (1 integrated, up to 3 more in an external housing) which I used for years. I bought my first copy of WordStar (plus the extra programs of MailMerge and SpellStar) all on 8" floppies from a company called Lifeboat Associates in New York, circa 1979.

A later PC I had (and sold many of), the original Osborne stored only 80k per floppy, as tyhey had saved money by designing their own controller board and could not get the density up beyond that.

The first IBM PCs featured 160k floppies - soon replaced with double-sided 320k models (PC-DOS 1.x). This was increased to the "normal" 360k quite quickly, with the introduction of PC-DOS 2.0.

The end of the floppy also brought the end of the copy-protected floppy, made famous by Lotus with their spreadsheet Lotus 1-2-3. These copy protected disks could tackled by PC-Copy II and other tools, for users who needed to make backups of their diskettes. That is one part of the floppy's history I do not mind leaving behind.

 

by Jack Bonn(anon) on ‎30-08-2012 04:41 AM
"Magnetic tape was common for storage in pre-personal computing days, but it had two main annoyances: it held tiny amounts of data, and it was slower than a slug on a cold spring morning."


Bigger annoyance: it was serial!

Typical first semester Fortran assignment was to read data to change a database, sort the changes by key, and then merge it into a database on tape that was also sorted by key.  The output would be to a second tape, written of course in key order.  This second tape was then ready for the next time this update operation was required.

by JS Garrison(anon) on ‎30-08-2012 06:46 PM

I didn't see the comment about Apple's first 3.5 inch floppies. Their capacity was 400k. Single sided.

by César Córcoles(anon) on ‎03-09-2012 08:42 AM

Any chance you'd grant permission to translate the (great, by the way) piece into Spanish? 

by Michelle Leverette(anon) on ‎06-09-2012 10:32 AM

Nice pics and good writeing. Haha :)

by Kimberly Leverette (anon) on ‎06-09-2012 10:36 AM

Lol wow Michelle u are so dumb lol whats u sis and talk to u inna longgg time u going to school ???

by Michelle Leverette(anon) on ‎06-09-2012 10:39 AM

Na duh im going to school how else do u think im on here and most of ur writing i couldnt understand ? and i gotta go byeee

by Fadi El-Eter(anon) on ‎07-09-2012 03:52 AM

I remember those days when we had 1 x 5.25" and 1x3.5" in our machines. It was great. All of my 5.25 disks became corrupt - most of my 3.5" disks were not.

I remember that Maxcell used to produce good quality disks, as well as Sony, of course. There was also another brand, called Memorex. The best was Maxcell though (I don't know if that brand actually exists at the moment).

 

Thanks for sharing,


Fadi El-Eter - http://www.itoctopus.com

Post a Comment
Be sure to enter a unique name. You can't reuse a name that's already in use.
Be sure to enter a unique email address. You can't reuse an email address that's already in use.
Type the characters you see in the picture above.Type the words you hear.

The HP Input Output site is sponsored by HP and features articles and content from HP and third-party contributors. Third-party articles and content, while paid for by HP, do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of HP. HP does not endorse this content and is not responsible for its accuracy, availability and quality.

Follow Us
Spotlight
"It's Not My Job" - Handling the Vendor Finger-Pointing Trap Is Teamwork Dead? A Post-Agile Prognosis Improving Your Personal Brand with Social Networking 5 Types of Meetings Every Business Must Explore
┼ Based on energy, paper and toner savings from regular printer usage. Results may vary.