Steven Hirsch wrote:
On 01/22/2011 01:32 PM, Linards Ticmanis wrote:On 01/22/2011 02:19 PM, vladitx wrote:My point is, that we don't need just another half-baked attempt at preservation. I have worked on this for couple of years now, on and off, and I want to give it a proper execution, resulting in a disk format, imaging devices, and a community working in cooperation for preserving the Apple II history. The incorrect preservation in various variants, while still better than nothing, is a source of noise and kind of a bad favour.Hello vladitx, would you consider the KryoFlux thing (www.kryoflux.com) a "half-baked attempt" too?Personally, I've never been quite sure what to make of KryoFlux. If it's not capable of writing a diskette, then I'm unclear as to what advantages it offers over other solutions.
I think that some preservationists consider that the job must be ultimately independent of any vintage hardware or media, relying instead on hardware-accurate emulation on the technology _du jour_. With this mindset, being able to write out accurate copies of programs is an unnecessary capability. The problem I see with all preservationist agendas is the immense disproportion between the effort required and the available resources. Now if someone could convince the Smithsonian Institution or the Library of Congress to take on the job... -michael NadaNet 3.1 for Apple II parallel computing! Home page: http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon/ "The wastebasket is our most important design tool--and it's seriously underused."