On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 01:05, Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > By refusing to create a "secondary" standard, he avoided dilution of > the standard
Well, I mean yes, in a theoretical ideal world. https://xkcd.com/927/ But in fact, what he really did was make DOS FAT the standard. With versions for DSDD 40T, DSDD 80T, DSHD 80T, DSED 80T, etc. I know your dislike -- maybe disdain is a better word? -- for using DOS FAT disk sizes as a measure of capacity, but it is what it is. _De facto_ standards tend to trump theoretical or industry ones. Dozens of OSes on as many non-x86 architectures can read and write DOS FAT16 diskettes. Even by the 1980s, many common platforms couldn't read CP/M disks. DR's slowness to adapt to x86 gave DOS its break, and from then on, DOS set the standards. No? -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven IoM: (+44) 7624 227612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884 Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
