[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5

Subject: Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
From: "Russ Gibson" <russg@travsoft.com>
Date: 1997/02/01
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Organization: Traveling Software, Inc.
References: <pdueck-1901970157490001@dial1.pli.mb.ca> <5btikr$8la$1@europa.frii.com> <20760888wnr@klatch.demon.co.uk> <5c3unn$oiv$1@europa.frii.com> <546648949wnr@klatch.demon.co.uk>



John Le Febvre <John@klatch.demon.co.uk> wrote in article 
> I didn't intend it to be 'nit-picking', merely stating that the Mac
> drives _will_ work on Apple IIs, even the 400K drive.
> 
> Apologies if this seems late.  My news server is 60 hours behind :(

Besides, all the UDC's were capable of supporting all the 3.5's (with
the exception of the AE 1.6 gig format) - although it was not always
publically announced.

The last ROM I was involved in, we actually took the UniDisk 3.5 code
out - but the hardware still supports it.

References:
- Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
  - From: shack@deimos.frii.com (Randy Shackelford)
- Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
  - From: John Le Febvre <John@klatch.demon.co.uk>
- Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
  - From: shack@deimos.frii.com (Randy Shackelford)
- Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
  - From: John Le Febvre <John@klatch.demon.co.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
Next by Date: Wolfinstein 3D
Previous by thread: Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
Next by thread: Re: Apple UniDisk 3.5 vs. Apple 3.5
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread