🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <135@dogmelb.dog.oz.au> david@dogmelb.dog.oz.au (David Le Blanc) writes:
>In article <1990Dec19.164559.19792@engin.umich.edu>, milamber@engin.umich.edu (Daryl Scott Cantrell) writes:
>>   Hmm, I just got a program to make my A3000's drive stop clicking
>Good for you..
>> Which brings up the
>> question, why does trackdisk default to clicking?  There seems to be
>Because that is what it has always been. (compatible!!)

That doesn't seem to be a logical reason.  HOW is it compatible, and why
is it important to remain compatible in whatever respect it is
compatible in?

>> no difference in functionality between clicking and not-clicking
>
>Er, *IF* the drive handles being stepped backward past track zero
>that is..

How does clicking prevent the drive from being stepped backward past
track zero???

>> state, and I can't imagine anyone actually WANTING ther drives to
>I dont *WANT* my drive to make that sound, but since it doesnt handle
>stepping back past track (0 or 1?), turning 'noclick' on, makes a worse
>noise, and may damage the drive!

Again, WHY!

>> make that annoying sound.. So why would Commodore go to all the
>> trouble of including this feature and yet force people to ftp a prog-

And why do Commodore drives require the click and why can't it be
eliminated, as other companies' machines do no have or need it?

[... rest, including what seemed to be a rude remark, deleted ...]

>> | |\\\ milamber@caen.engin.umich.edu    |    shared by all of    //  |
>Email: david@dogmelb.dog@munnari.oz    |    Division of Geomechanics,
--
Chris Dailey   dailey@(frith.egr|cpsin.cps).msu.edu
BRD += DDR;
DDR = NULL;
num_countries --;