Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:18187 comp.unix.xenix:3028 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!mcnc!duke!romeo!rlw From: rlw@romeo.cs.duke.edu (Robert Wolpert) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.unix.xenix Subject: PC/AT Disk Controllers: What's Available??? Keywords: AT Disk Controller, RLL vs MFM, 1.44Mb = drive A??? Message-ID: <12233@duke.cs.duke.edu> Date: 18 Aug 88 15:48:44 GMT Sender: news@duke.cs.duke.edu Reply-To: rlw@duke.UUCP () Distribution: na Organization: Duke University CS Dept.; Durham, NC Lines: 18 My IBM PC/AT's F/H disk controller bit the dust; is it possible to replace it with something better (and usable both under Xenix and DOS), e.g. 1) A controller that supports 1.44Mb, preferably as A: (to do so it would have to have on-board POST rom to replace the AT's default boot sequence, wouldn't it?); *OR* 2) A controller with on-board cache, possibly enabling 1:1 interleave; *OR* 3) A RLL controller that packs more onto my Bell B/86 drive (actually a Toshiba 86Mb unformatted, ~70 Mb drive), originally running with IBM's MFM controller. Is it possible to use a RLL controller with a disk intended for MFM?? I don't know whether that's a feature of the controller only, or of both controller and disk. Thanks---- Please reply by e-mail to rlw@cs.duke.edu /or/ {decvax | ihnp4 | ... }.duke!rlw --Thanx