31–40 of 43 posts
“The Air Force completed a replacement of the aging SACCS floppy drives with a highly secure solid-state digital storage solution in June,” Sounds like flash drives. Perhaps even USB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The sources I could find say that they didn't replace the computers accessing the data. They are still IBM Series/1 [1] machines. So whatever is being used, there has to be some kind of floppy (or tape, etc) emulator in front of it. It's likely the floppy drive in question was an IBM 23FD "Minnow"[2]. The capacity and timeframe matches up. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Series/1 [2] https://historyofinformatio…
The US military after using 37 different shell companies to purchase hundreds of gotek floppy emulators and 5.25" to 3.5" drive brackets: > Damn I'm good at modernization
This might be controversial, but I don't see anything inherently wrong with non-networked computer systems using old tech. I think a lot of tech nerds see the tech as the sole capability of a system, ie 2x the clock speed is 2x the capability, but that's just not how real world systems work. The biggest issues seem to be getting replacement components as systems age or new systems are purchased (like with the scaling…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
8" was the standard size before 5.25" became the norm. Which happened because of the IBM PC using them as standard.
And just to point out, the logical capacity of those disks increased with each physical reduction. Nearly doubling each time. (The best 8" disks had about 1/2 of the capacity of the worst 5 1/4" one, and the best 5 1/4" disk had about 1/2 of the capacity of the worst 3 1/2" one.) I guess even if IBM didn't put it on the PC, everybody would migrate into 5 1/4" disks on almost the same timeline. Those changes were very…
What's funny is that the floppy discs they used weren't the 3,5" hard ones people remember from the 90's (the save button icon) but the old 5,25" ones that were actually floppy. That was some ancient shit.
Weren’t they ever bigger than that? I have a vague recollection that it was some sort of 8” oddball format. Maybe even a one-off?
> The Defense Department has transitioned away from a 1970s-era nuclear command and control system that relied on eight-inch floppy disks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it safe to breathe that dust? I'd like the smell of nuclear floppy in the morning.
Depending on how the microplastics were disposed of, you may already have fragments of the nuclear floppies in your bloodstream.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And just to point out, the logical capacity of those disks increased with each physical reduction. Nearly doubling each time. (The best 8" disks had about 1/2 of the capacity of the worst 5 1/4" one, and the best 5 1/4" disk had about 1/2 of the capacity of the worst 3 1/2" one.) I guess even if IBM didn't put it on the PC, everybody would migrate into 5 1/4" disks on almost the same timeline. Those changes were very…
The standard 8" floppy by 1980 was 2MB, 5.25" never beat that, and 3.5" only beat that technically, 'ED' 2.88MB, LS120 and SuperDisk were all very rarely used in reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weren’t they ever bigger than that? I have a vague recollection that it was some sort of 8” oddball format. Maybe even a one-off?
8" was the standard size before 5.25" became the norm. Which happened because of the IBM PC using them as standard.
This might be controversial, but I don't see anything inherently wrong with non-networked computer systems using old tech. I think a lot of tech nerds see the tech as the sole capability of a system, ie 2x the clock speed is 2x the capability, but that's just not how real world systems work. The biggest issues seem to be getting replacement components as systems age or new systems are purchased (like with the scaling…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weren’t they ever bigger than that? I have a vague recollection that it was some sort of 8” oddball format. Maybe even a one-off?
8" was the standard size before 5.25" became the norm. Which happened because of the IBM PC using them as standard.