Did 5.25" floppies undergo a change in magnetic coating?












10















3.5" floppy disks, in the transition from 720K to 1.44M, changed the actual coating to a different compound that was magnetically 'stiffer'. This was necessary to support the higher density, but meant the old disks could not support the new high-density format even if used in a new drive. A more subtle and much nastier problem: if you formatted a new disk in an old drive, everything would seem fine, but the information would not have been recorded strongly enough, and might fade over the next few days.



5.25" floppies made several format transitions that together accomplished an order of magnitude capacity increase until the final 1.2M format. Did any of these transitions involve a similar change in the actual coating? Or did the disks themselves stay interchangeable apart from issues of hard versus soft sectors?










share|improve this question



























    10















    3.5" floppy disks, in the transition from 720K to 1.44M, changed the actual coating to a different compound that was magnetically 'stiffer'. This was necessary to support the higher density, but meant the old disks could not support the new high-density format even if used in a new drive. A more subtle and much nastier problem: if you formatted a new disk in an old drive, everything would seem fine, but the information would not have been recorded strongly enough, and might fade over the next few days.



    5.25" floppies made several format transitions that together accomplished an order of magnitude capacity increase until the final 1.2M format. Did any of these transitions involve a similar change in the actual coating? Or did the disks themselves stay interchangeable apart from issues of hard versus soft sectors?










    share|improve this question

























      10












      10








      10








      3.5" floppy disks, in the transition from 720K to 1.44M, changed the actual coating to a different compound that was magnetically 'stiffer'. This was necessary to support the higher density, but meant the old disks could not support the new high-density format even if used in a new drive. A more subtle and much nastier problem: if you formatted a new disk in an old drive, everything would seem fine, but the information would not have been recorded strongly enough, and might fade over the next few days.



      5.25" floppies made several format transitions that together accomplished an order of magnitude capacity increase until the final 1.2M format. Did any of these transitions involve a similar change in the actual coating? Or did the disks themselves stay interchangeable apart from issues of hard versus soft sectors?










      share|improve this question














      3.5" floppy disks, in the transition from 720K to 1.44M, changed the actual coating to a different compound that was magnetically 'stiffer'. This was necessary to support the higher density, but meant the old disks could not support the new high-density format even if used in a new drive. A more subtle and much nastier problem: if you formatted a new disk in an old drive, everything would seem fine, but the information would not have been recorded strongly enough, and might fade over the next few days.



      5.25" floppies made several format transitions that together accomplished an order of magnitude capacity increase until the final 1.2M format. Did any of these transitions involve a similar change in the actual coating? Or did the disks themselves stay interchangeable apart from issues of hard versus soft sectors?







      history hardware floppy-disk






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 12 hours ago









      rwallacerwallace

      9,405446138




      9,405446138






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          15














          The main technical parameter for a floppy disk's coating is its coercitiviy, i.e. the resistance of ferromagnetic matter to withstand demagnetization. Coercitivity is measured in Oersted, after Hans Christian Ørsted, a Danish physicist who discovered the magnetic impact of electrical current.




          • 5 1/4" disks storing 360K and 720K (SD and DD) used a coating with a coercitivity of 300 Oersted.

          • 5 1/4 disks storing 1.2M used a coating with a coercitivity of 600 Oersted.


          So yes, the coating was changed to support the HD format.



          The difference between 5 1/4" DD and HD coating is much larger than the same difference between 3 1/2" DD and HD media - which is 660 Oe an 720 Oe, respectively.






          share|improve this answer


























          • Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

            – Selcuk
            4 hours ago











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "648"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9300%2fdid-5-25-floppies-undergo-a-change-in-magnetic-coating%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          15














          The main technical parameter for a floppy disk's coating is its coercitiviy, i.e. the resistance of ferromagnetic matter to withstand demagnetization. Coercitivity is measured in Oersted, after Hans Christian Ørsted, a Danish physicist who discovered the magnetic impact of electrical current.




          • 5 1/4" disks storing 360K and 720K (SD and DD) used a coating with a coercitivity of 300 Oersted.

          • 5 1/4 disks storing 1.2M used a coating with a coercitivity of 600 Oersted.


          So yes, the coating was changed to support the HD format.



          The difference between 5 1/4" DD and HD coating is much larger than the same difference between 3 1/2" DD and HD media - which is 660 Oe an 720 Oe, respectively.






          share|improve this answer


























          • Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

            – Selcuk
            4 hours ago
















          15














          The main technical parameter for a floppy disk's coating is its coercitiviy, i.e. the resistance of ferromagnetic matter to withstand demagnetization. Coercitivity is measured in Oersted, after Hans Christian Ørsted, a Danish physicist who discovered the magnetic impact of electrical current.




          • 5 1/4" disks storing 360K and 720K (SD and DD) used a coating with a coercitivity of 300 Oersted.

          • 5 1/4 disks storing 1.2M used a coating with a coercitivity of 600 Oersted.


          So yes, the coating was changed to support the HD format.



          The difference between 5 1/4" DD and HD coating is much larger than the same difference between 3 1/2" DD and HD media - which is 660 Oe an 720 Oe, respectively.






          share|improve this answer


























          • Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

            – Selcuk
            4 hours ago














          15












          15








          15







          The main technical parameter for a floppy disk's coating is its coercitiviy, i.e. the resistance of ferromagnetic matter to withstand demagnetization. Coercitivity is measured in Oersted, after Hans Christian Ørsted, a Danish physicist who discovered the magnetic impact of electrical current.




          • 5 1/4" disks storing 360K and 720K (SD and DD) used a coating with a coercitivity of 300 Oersted.

          • 5 1/4 disks storing 1.2M used a coating with a coercitivity of 600 Oersted.


          So yes, the coating was changed to support the HD format.



          The difference between 5 1/4" DD and HD coating is much larger than the same difference between 3 1/2" DD and HD media - which is 660 Oe an 720 Oe, respectively.






          share|improve this answer















          The main technical parameter for a floppy disk's coating is its coercitiviy, i.e. the resistance of ferromagnetic matter to withstand demagnetization. Coercitivity is measured in Oersted, after Hans Christian Ørsted, a Danish physicist who discovered the magnetic impact of electrical current.




          • 5 1/4" disks storing 360K and 720K (SD and DD) used a coating with a coercitivity of 300 Oersted.

          • 5 1/4 disks storing 1.2M used a coating with a coercitivity of 600 Oersted.


          So yes, the coating was changed to support the HD format.



          The difference between 5 1/4" DD and HD coating is much larger than the same difference between 3 1/2" DD and HD media - which is 660 Oe an 720 Oe, respectively.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 9 hours ago

























          answered 10 hours ago









          tofrotofro

          15.7k33190




          15.7k33190













          • Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

            – Selcuk
            4 hours ago



















          • Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

            – Selcuk
            4 hours ago

















          Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

          – Selcuk
          4 hours ago





          Do you have any idea why the difference in 3.5" was smaller? Is it because DD had already a higher than needed coercivity (by the way, you have a typo there) from the beginning? Does that also mean that they could have produced DD-compatible drives with higher capacity instead of introducing a slightly different coating?

          – Selcuk
          4 hours ago


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9300%2fdid-5-25-floppies-undergo-a-change-in-magnetic-coating%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          GameSpot

          日野市

          Tu-95轟炸機