Talk:Floppy disk format

This is an in-development article intended to pull in more technical details of physical density and various platforms' storage formats for floppy disks, eventually (but not yet as of this writing) to subsume some of the history information from the floppy disk article. -- Todd Vierling 12:42, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Flippy" formats shouldn't be in the table, right?
Hello,

many computer users flipped their single-sided floppy disks over back in the 1980s. Still I don't think such "formats" should be in the table. AFAIK Apple never built two-sided 5.25 inch drives for their Apple II line. Maybe somebody with more skill in editing complex tables could remove them? -- 85.179.160.177 23:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Merger proposal
There appears to be a lot of redundant information regarding floppy disk physical media characteristics as well as logical format information between these three articles.

I propose breaking some of this information out of the floppy disk page, which is too long in my opinion, as well as completely merging the Table of 8-inch floppy formats page, which appears to be alone in that there are no 5.25" and 3.5" formats table pages.

So here are a few options we could do... 1) Generic floppy disk page, floppy fisk formats page 2) Generic floppy disk page, floppy disk physical media page (SD/DD/QD/HD/EHD, SS/DS, soft/hard sectoring, substrate coating, etc...), floppy disk logical format page (x tracks, y sectors, z bytes per block, manufacturer a, introduction date b, etc...) 3) Generic floppy disk page, floppy disk physical media page, generic logical format page, separate table pages for each size of disk. We can also add a footer for quick linking between the different sizes. Dinjiin (talk) 18:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The Table of 8-inch floppy formats was created not to clutter the existing floppy disk page as it was too large years ago. However, I have not had much time to work with it.  Which would be better I honestly don't know.  --Frodet (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Merge with Single Sided, Double Density
The above conversation doesn't seem to be going anywhere, so I recommend that the articles be dealt with individually. The Single Sided, Double Density article, for example, is not substantial enough to exist on its own and should be merged here. Neelix (talk) 23:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)