From: dunric@yahoo.com (Paul Allen Panks) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: The Diskette Experiments Date: 17 Oct 2004 03:01:24 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 227 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.231.37.57 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1098007284 29212 127.0.0.1 (17 Oct 2004 10:01:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:01:24 +0000 (UTC) Path: nightfall.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!news.glorb.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: nightfall.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:187657 "The Diskette Experiments: A Hypothetical Longevity of the Floppy Disk" By: Paul Allen Panks (dunric@yahoo.com) See website for details. Written summary below: http://members.tripod.com/~panks/diskfun.html In three separate experiments (conducted at regular intervals), I have determined the hypothetical longevity and general integrity of data (both read and recorded) on the standard 5.25" floppy diskette. Such diskettes are common to the Atari 400/800, Commodore 64/128, Apple II/IIe and other 8-bit computers. 3.5" disks were not tested. Here are the results of my experiements (conducted on 5.25" floppy diskettes for the Commodore 64/128 line of microcomputers): ************************************************************* Experiment One: Freezing diskette (Conducted in January 2003) ************************************************************* Hypothesis: Frozen diskettes lose data, even if frozen overnight. I froze a diskette overnight in a freezer, without the diskette holder protecting the exposed mylar surface. I left the diskette intact inside the disk jacket, though. The disk received condensation on the exposed portion of the mylar surface (of the diskette), and was extremely cold to the touch. I noticed no physical alterations to the diskette, however (e.g. no warping or physical damages; only coldness and condensation). The disk drive booted the floppy disk directory without effort, and the contents read without problem. Programs all loaded without error. Conclusion: Freezing a diskette overnight probably won't damage the diskette enough to ruin diskette data integrity, but probably isn't a good idea, anyway. ************************************************************* Experiment Two: Overheating diskette (Conducted in June 2004) ************************************************************* Hypothesis: Heating a diskette to even slightly above room temperature is asking for data loss. I overheated a diskette next to a space heater, without the diskette holder protecting the exposed mylar surface. The diskette melted a little bit near the center, at which point I removed the diskette from the space heater's range of heat. The diskette was heated for approximately 10 seconds at a distance of 2-3" (inches) from the space heater. ***DISCLAIMER***: *Do Not* attempt this experiment *at all* unless you have _already_ safely practiced doing so!!! Heating any object near a space heater is *VERY* dangerous and should *NOT* be attempted by unexperienced person(s)!! The reason(s) for testing the heat durability of a 5.25" diskette were two-fold: One, I wanted to disprove the notion that a minimal amount of excess heat can ruin a diskette's data integrity. Secondly, I wanted to test the theory proposed that 5.25" HD (96 TPI) diskettes could still be formatted with a 1541/1571 disk drive despite the small Tracks Per Inch (normal is 48 TPI on the Commodore 64/128 computers for a 5.25" diskette). Conclusion: Heating a 96 TPI (HD) 5.25" diskette (or 48 TPI diskette) to 95-115 degrees fahrenheit does not appear to affect data integrity in any significant fashion, although outright *burning* of the diskette *will* affect data integrity! The 96 TPI diskette, once heated, formatted without error on both the 1541 and 1571 disk drives, but *could not* be reformatted once the diskette cooled to room temperature (approximately 5 minutes time). Additionally, the diskette had to be reheated to a high temperature once again in order to reformat over the previous formatted contents. ******************************************************************** Experiment Three: Diskette burial for 554 days (March 2003-Oct 2004) ******************************************************************** Hypothesis: Burying a diskette for over a period of a year, approximately 1.5 feet underground, will expose the diskette to dirt, rain and other unsavory elements, even when contained within a ZipLock(TM) plastic bag. This experiment took exactly 554 days to complete...1 year, 6 months and 7 days, to be exact. I buried a floppy diskette with (data on both sides) in my parent's backyard at a depth of approximately 18 inches. I made sure that I protected the diskette as reasonably as possible, including placing the diskette inside a paper disk jacket, while also sealing the entire contents inside an enclosed ZipLock plastic bag. Conclusion: Even when sealed in a Ziplock plastic bag, and despite being buried 18 inches underground, both the weight of the dirt atop the diskette and the elements of water and wind severely warped the diskette into a bowl-shaped wedge (think: bowl of soup wedged). The poor diskette was unreadable as is; that is, without removing the mylar internal diskette from the disk jacket itself and placing it inside a new disk jacket (scrapped from a throw away blank diskette I had no general use for). I noted the following damage to the internal mylar diskette as I inserted it into the second disk jacket: A) Physical damage present near the center of the diskette, where Track 18 was likely to reside. B) Minor physical damage to the outer diskette, but mostly on the left side where it had warped upward. Nearly identical damage was evident on the right side, where the same warping was circularly present. C) Non-consequential smearing from dirt, visible just above the (writable) track/sector area of the disk's mylar surface (left of the main diskette ring hub). The disk was inserted into the new diskette jacket and the jacket itself was taped back shut via normal Scotch(TM) brand tape. Conclusion: Because the diskette contained data on BOTH sides of the diskette, I expected the back side to have less data loss than the front side (due to warping/other damage). I was right. The results of the data loss on the front side were as follows: The disk directory read, but failed after only 7 programs had been read (at least 40 programs were on the front side of the diskette in late-March of 2003). This suggested serious damage to the middle of the diskette, namely, Track 18. Not a good start. I began loading the remaining programs one by one. Program 1, of 38 blocks, failed after only 0.5 blocks had been read. Since it was the very first program on the diskette, this suggested it was written very, very close to where the directory itself was written. Program 2, a 3 block file, loaded 2 blocks out of 3 before it, too, failed. Program 3, a 7 block file, loaded fine, with 100% accuracy. However, Line 23 of the program (read in Commodore 128 mode) was complete gibberish, with weird commands like "CIRCLENEW TAN &STEPFOR" where normal, regular BASIC statements would be. Line 24 was normal, as was the remainder of the program. This suggested physical damage to the mylar surface of the diskette. Program 4, a 1 block file, loaded fine, with 100% accuracy, and listed fine as well. Program 5, a 63 block file, failed after only 1.5 blocks had been read. This was very similar to how the first program faired. Program 6, a 9 block file, loaded fine, with 100% accuracy, and listed fine as well (with no errors). This surprised me greatly, as a much smaller program did not. Program 7, a 3 block file, loaded fine, with 100% accuracy, and listed fine as well (with no errors). I have not yet checked the remainder of the 1st side with Disk Doctor 4.0, and have not read through each and every Track/Sector to see how it looks in a diskette editor. However, Side 1 lost approximately 500 blocks of data (roughly an 85-90% data loss). This was the most severely warped (bowl) portion of the diskette, and could only be read by the disk drive when I inserted the internal mylar diskette into a new diskette jacket altogether. The flip side, which was not damaged much at all, only contained minor errors. The programs occupied a maxium of 61 *total* blocks on the flip side of the diskette, leaving 603 blocks free. The directory read without error, although Track 18, Sector 14 was not readable. Because directory data was not on Track 18, Sector 14, data loss on that particular T/S was not evident. The programs (7 in all, out of 7 total) read as follows: Program 1, a 3 block file, loaded 2 out of 3 blocks, but failed. Listing the program only displayed most of it, with the last few lines just pure gibberish. Program 2, a backup of Program 1 (done intentionally), loaded all 3 blocks, and listed and ran fine. Program 3, a sequential file of 3 blocks in length, was read through the following "quickie" program: 5 PRINT"ENTER FILENAME";:INPUT A$ 10 OPEN 2,8,2,"0:"+F$+",S,R" 15 GET#2,A$:PRINT A$;:IF ST<>64 THEN GOTO 15 20 CLOSE 2:END The sequential file read most of the way through, but failed to read anymore data halfway through the last 1/6th of the file itself. Checking a backup of the same file (from another diskette), data loss was between 2-3% of the file, with only the last few sentences lost. Program 4, a BASIC program of 18 blocks in length, loaded 12 of the 18 blocks before failure. Listing the program revealed gibberish about halfway through the program. Program 5, a BASIC program of 11 blocks in length, wouldn't even load (gave a "?FILE NOT FOUND ERROR"; wouldn't even grace me with a "LOADING PROGRAM"..."?READ ERROR" message). Program 6, a BASIC program of 19 blocks in length, loaded with 100% accuracy and without error. The program LISTed and was RUN without any errors. Conclusion: Burying a diskette even 18 inches below the ground for a period exceeding 1 calendar year, even when protected in a ZipLock(TM) sealed plastic bag, is generally *not* a good idea. Water (from rain) and other elements warped the physical nature of the diskette, as did the 18 inches of dirt laying atop the diskette (inside a sealed ZipLock(TM) plastic bag). Even rescuing the internal mylar floppy from the disk jacket and transfering it into a fresh disk jacket failed to solve data loss. Physical damages to the diskette, although minimal to the eye, were nevertheless responsible for a total of at least 38 programs (out of 45 total) either loading only 65-70% of the way, failing altogether (0%-2% of the way) or loading without error (only 5 loaded without error, and the largest program of that variety was a mere 9 blocks in length). Final Conclusion: Diskettes are surprisingly resistant to temperature, but are very fragile to dirt, water and other environmental factors. Even minor physical damages to the diskette surfaces caused substantial diskette errors/loss. Errors noted (on either side) were: #20, #21, #22, #23 and #27; no other diskette errors were noted or found). Sincerely, Paul Allen Panks dunric@yahoo.com ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: The Diskette Experiments References: From: Pascal Bourguignon Date: 17 Oct 2004 19:29:58 +0200 Message-ID: <87r7nx5k2x.fsf@thalassa.informatimago.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 Organization: [posted via Easynet Spain] NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.93.174.79 X-Trace: DXC=hhn2m1`N1iK8@5WX[E>QmGEY<>`XO4V7M>Uh "The Diskette Experiments: A Hypothetical Longevity of the Floppy Disk" > By: Paul Allen Panks (dunric@yahoo.com) > > See website for details. Written summary below: > > http://members.tripod.com/~panks/diskfun.html Thank you, very interesting. Do you plan to do the same with CD, CDR and DVD? If you have a useless hard disk, I'd suggest to test it too. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ Voting Democrat or Republican is like choosing a cabin in the Titanic. ###### From: "Charlie Gibbs" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: The Diskette Experiments Date: 17 Oct 04 12:07:45 -0800 Organization: http://newsguy.com Lines: 32 Message-ID: <1427.786T2299T7275700@kltpzyxm.invalid> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: p-996.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: THOR 2.5a (Amiga;TCP/IP) Path: nightfall.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!irazu.switch.ch!switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!129.250.175.17!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!news4 Xref: nightfall.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:187697 In article , dunric@yahoo.com (Paul Allen Panks) writes: >"The Diskette Experiments: A Hypothetical Longevity of the Floppy Disk" >By: Paul Allen Panks (dunric@yahoo.com) [snip] Interesting. Apparently floppies have proven themselves more robust than was believed when Stan Kelly-Bootle wrote: Floppettes must be handled with great care. Keep away from tobacco smoke, grease, nuclear reactors, gravitational fields, ballpoint pens, fingers, meteorites, untreated sewage, and floppy-disk drives. Always store away from strong moonlight at 0 Kelvin in a neutrino-free environment. The failures encountered in the burial experiment are no doubt due to the mechanical stresses of being under a mound of earth which probably shifted slightly over time. If the floppy disk had been enclosed in a rigid box it would likely have fared better. On the other hand, if the disk were buried in a pile of books, papers, old hard drives, etc. it would likely suffer similar damage. (Although my desk would provide a suitable environment for such a test, I'm not willing to spend the time to conduct this experiment.) -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign! ###### From: shoppa@trailing-edge.com (Tim Shoppa) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: The Diskette Experiments Date: 18 Oct 2004 05:13:38 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 29 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 170.121.15.35 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1098101619 8173 127.0.0.1 (18 Oct 2004 12:13:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Path: nightfall.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!news.glorb.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: nightfall.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:187738 dunric@yahoo.com (Paul Allen Panks) wrote in message news:... > In three separate experiments (conducted at regular intervals), I have > determined the hypothetical longevity and general integrity of data > (both read and recorded) on the standard 5.25" floppy diskette. Such > diskettes are common to the Atari 400/800, Commodore 64/128, Apple > II/IIe and other 8-bit computers. 3.5" disks were not tested. > Hypothesis: Frozen diskettes lose data, even if frozen overnight. > Hypothesis: Heating a diskette to even slightly above room temperature > is asking for data loss. > Hypothesis: Burying a diskette for over a period of a year, > approximately 1.5 feet underground, will expose the diskette to dirt, > rain and other unsavory elements, even when contained within a > ZipLock(TM) plastic bag. Over longer time scales, I have had very good success recovering data from 30 year old 8" floppies, some of which were not stored under exactly ideal conditions. (But not buried in dirt!). Flaking oxide does limit the number of retries you get with floppies that old and can require frequent head cleaning. At least with SS 8" floppies, it is trivially easy to get to and clean the heads, and there is the head load pad which you can press down on for those difficult spots :-) I don't really trust those newfangled double-sided drives. In fact, I personally believe the SA801 (original PCB, not the VLSI PCB) was the pinnacle of removable disk technology. Tim. ###### From: aek@spies.com (Al Kossow) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: The Diskette Experiments Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:05:43 -0700 Organization: Apple Computer, Inc. Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: haxrus.apple.com X-Trace: news.apple.com 1098126343 1086 17.205.21.66 (18 Oct 2004 19:05:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.apple.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 19:05:43 +0000 (UTC) Path: nightfall.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.ip-plus.net!newsfeed.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.glorb.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!newsfeed1.sea.pnap.net!newsfeed.pnap.net!forum.apple.com!news.apple.com!haxrus.apple.com!user Xref: nightfall.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:187782 In article , shoppa@trailing-edge.com (Tim Shoppa) wrote: > I don't really trust those newfangled double-sided drives. In fact, > I personally believe the SA801 (original PCB, not the VLSI PCB) > was the pinnacle of removable disk technology. > If you need to read double-sided media, Qume DT-8's are quite good. Carving grooves in the oxide IS the biggest problem with poorly stored floppies. ###### From: shoppa@trailing-edge.com (Tim Shoppa) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: The Diskette Experiments Date: 19 Oct 2004 07:38:49 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 170.121.15.35 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1098196730 26292 127.0.0.1 (19 Oct 2004 14:38:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Path: nightfall.franklin.ch!pfaff2.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!solnet.ch!solnet.ch!news.glorb.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: nightfall.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:187880 aek@spies.com (Al Kossow) wrote in message news:... > In article , > shoppa@trailing-edge.com (Tim Shoppa) wrote: > > > I don't really trust those newfangled double-sided drives. In fact, > > I personally believe the SA801 (original PCB, not the VLSI PCB) > > was the pinnacle of removable disk technology. > > > > If you need to read double-sided media, Qume DT-8's are quite good. Yeah, they're not bad, but it's several orders of magnitude more difficult to clean the heads. (Not that DEC's RX01's and RX02's were easier. Even though single-sided drives you had to pull a mongo-huge PCB just to see the heads). > Carving grooves in the oxide IS the biggest problem with poorly > stored floppies. Even well-stored floppies will do some of that after 30 years. Tim.