Purpose of 2 disk drives on the Osbourne 1











up vote
4
down vote

favorite












I recently discovered the Osbourne 1 computer, and I noticed it had 2 floppy disc drives.



What was the purpose of including 2 drives?










share|improve this question









New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1




    It didn't. It had 2 drives and 2 slots for storage. If you zoom in the pictures you will see that the lower holes just are storage slots.
    – UncleBod
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - I see. Corrected!
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - Still, why provide more than one disk drive? What was the purpose, for copying? Was it possible to load data off of two drives at the same time?
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago















up vote
4
down vote

favorite












I recently discovered the Osbourne 1 computer, and I noticed it had 2 floppy disc drives.



What was the purpose of including 2 drives?










share|improve this question









New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1




    It didn't. It had 2 drives and 2 slots for storage. If you zoom in the pictures you will see that the lower holes just are storage slots.
    – UncleBod
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - I see. Corrected!
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - Still, why provide more than one disk drive? What was the purpose, for copying? Was it possible to load data off of two drives at the same time?
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago













up vote
4
down vote

favorite









up vote
4
down vote

favorite











I recently discovered the Osbourne 1 computer, and I noticed it had 2 floppy disc drives.



What was the purpose of including 2 drives?










share|improve this question









New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











I recently discovered the Osbourne 1 computer, and I noticed it had 2 floppy disc drives.



What was the purpose of including 2 drives?







hardware floppy-disk






share|improve this question









New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 5 hours ago









Tommy

13.4k13466




13.4k13466






New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 5 hours ago









QueenSvetlana

233




233




New contributor




QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






QueenSvetlana is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    It didn't. It had 2 drives and 2 slots for storage. If you zoom in the pictures you will see that the lower holes just are storage slots.
    – UncleBod
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - I see. Corrected!
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - Still, why provide more than one disk drive? What was the purpose, for copying? Was it possible to load data off of two drives at the same time?
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago














  • 1




    It didn't. It had 2 drives and 2 slots for storage. If you zoom in the pictures you will see that the lower holes just are storage slots.
    – UncleBod
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - I see. Corrected!
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago












  • @UncleBod - Still, why provide more than one disk drive? What was the purpose, for copying? Was it possible to load data off of two drives at the same time?
    – QueenSvetlana
    5 hours ago








1




1




It didn't. It had 2 drives and 2 slots for storage. If you zoom in the pictures you will see that the lower holes just are storage slots.
– UncleBod
5 hours ago






It didn't. It had 2 drives and 2 slots for storage. If you zoom in the pictures you will see that the lower holes just are storage slots.
– UncleBod
5 hours ago














@UncleBod - I see. Corrected!
– QueenSvetlana
5 hours ago






@UncleBod - I see. Corrected!
– QueenSvetlana
5 hours ago














@UncleBod - Still, why provide more than one disk drive? What was the purpose, for copying? Was it possible to load data off of two drives at the same time?
– QueenSvetlana
5 hours ago




@UncleBod - Still, why provide more than one disk drive? What was the purpose, for copying? Was it possible to load data off of two drives at the same time?
– QueenSvetlana
5 hours ago










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
9
down vote



accepted










Remember that these systems (not only the Osborne 1) didn't have harddisks. Everything ran from floppies.



So usually you had one floppy where the program was on, together with OS related files. And another floppy for your data, texts and so on.



That was workable with two drives, but still was impractical if you wanted to copy data. Usually there was some way to load a program and then use the first drive for a second data disk while doing the copying, but then you had to re-insert the system disk etc. So a third drive wouldn't have been too bad (but few systems had one).



TL;DR: You could never have enough floppy drives. Working with one floppy drive was a pain sometimes because you often had to switch disks; working with two was enough for most cases; and sometimes more than two would have been nice.



The same was true for other systems like the DEC PDP-8, which used DEC tapes pretty much the same way floppies were used on CP/M systems. And there were tape controllers which allowed for four tape drives. This was there for a reason...






share|improve this answer





















  • I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
    – Brian H
    14 mins ago


















up vote
2
down vote













Note CP/M (the Operating system of the Osborne) didn't have subdirectories as we know today (which more or less forced you to dedicate a disk for a specific purpose in order to keep the overview), it also had very limited storage capacity per disk drive (~180k on a SS/SD disk as on the Osborne 1).



That means you typically held the application (for example WordStar, with a typical disk footprint of ~50-60kBytes) on one drive on a write-protected disk (in case it had to load overlays or messages) and the actual text you were working on on a disk in the other drive (the working disk). If you didn't want to be forced to constantly swap disks, you also put the operating system files on your program disk which also took some of the capacity.



You could have worked with only one drive, but that was much more cumbersome and carried the risk of destroying your program disk (because that could not be write-protected, then) or you had to change disks occasionally.



Obviously copying between disks was much simpler with a 2-drive setup, as others have mentioned.






share|improve this answer






























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Since the computer only has disk drives and no hard-disk, the normal usage was to have the system programs and a word processor or database handler on one diskette and using the other for data or documents.
    Those drives were single side, single density as standard, which gave a storage capacity of somewhere around 100 kBytes each.






    share|improve this answer




























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      The Osborne 1, like many computers of the time, had no means of data storage other than floppy disks. On powering up, the user would be prompted to insert the operating system disk, so the machine could boot.



      Even when running other software, the computer would need to access and run parts of the OS periodically. If you only had one floppy drive, you'd have to continuously eject and insert the OS disk and your data disk when running some commands. It was far more desirable to have two drives available, so the OS disk could be left in one drive for most of the time.



      Having two floppy drives also speeds up copying files between different disks, but this is a secondary benefit.



      The provision of two floppy drives was also common with other machines, such as the IBM PC and the BBC Micro (though the latter had its OS in a ROM on the motherboard). When hard drives were installed in computers, the OS could be installed there, and there was no longer such a benefit from having a second floppy drive.






      share|improve this answer





















      • Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
        – supercat
        5 hours ago










      • @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
        – alephzero
        5 hours ago












      • @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
        – supercat
        4 hours ago




















      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Most business computers of that time had two floppy drives, and the Osbourne was entirely unexceptional in this regard.



      Apple II (By Rama, CC BY-SA 2.0 fr)
      enter image description here



      IBM PC (By Ruben de Rijcke - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0)



      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer





















        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "648"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });






        QueenSvetlana is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f8405%2fpurpose-of-2-disk-drives-on-the-osbourne-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted










        Remember that these systems (not only the Osborne 1) didn't have harddisks. Everything ran from floppies.



        So usually you had one floppy where the program was on, together with OS related files. And another floppy for your data, texts and so on.



        That was workable with two drives, but still was impractical if you wanted to copy data. Usually there was some way to load a program and then use the first drive for a second data disk while doing the copying, but then you had to re-insert the system disk etc. So a third drive wouldn't have been too bad (but few systems had one).



        TL;DR: You could never have enough floppy drives. Working with one floppy drive was a pain sometimes because you often had to switch disks; working with two was enough for most cases; and sometimes more than two would have been nice.



        The same was true for other systems like the DEC PDP-8, which used DEC tapes pretty much the same way floppies were used on CP/M systems. And there were tape controllers which allowed for four tape drives. This was there for a reason...






        share|improve this answer





















        • I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
          – Brian H
          14 mins ago















        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted










        Remember that these systems (not only the Osborne 1) didn't have harddisks. Everything ran from floppies.



        So usually you had one floppy where the program was on, together with OS related files. And another floppy for your data, texts and so on.



        That was workable with two drives, but still was impractical if you wanted to copy data. Usually there was some way to load a program and then use the first drive for a second data disk while doing the copying, but then you had to re-insert the system disk etc. So a third drive wouldn't have been too bad (but few systems had one).



        TL;DR: You could never have enough floppy drives. Working with one floppy drive was a pain sometimes because you often had to switch disks; working with two was enough for most cases; and sometimes more than two would have been nice.



        The same was true for other systems like the DEC PDP-8, which used DEC tapes pretty much the same way floppies were used on CP/M systems. And there were tape controllers which allowed for four tape drives. This was there for a reason...






        share|improve this answer





















        • I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
          – Brian H
          14 mins ago













        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        9
        down vote



        accepted






        Remember that these systems (not only the Osborne 1) didn't have harddisks. Everything ran from floppies.



        So usually you had one floppy where the program was on, together with OS related files. And another floppy for your data, texts and so on.



        That was workable with two drives, but still was impractical if you wanted to copy data. Usually there was some way to load a program and then use the first drive for a second data disk while doing the copying, but then you had to re-insert the system disk etc. So a third drive wouldn't have been too bad (but few systems had one).



        TL;DR: You could never have enough floppy drives. Working with one floppy drive was a pain sometimes because you often had to switch disks; working with two was enough for most cases; and sometimes more than two would have been nice.



        The same was true for other systems like the DEC PDP-8, which used DEC tapes pretty much the same way floppies were used on CP/M systems. And there were tape controllers which allowed for four tape drives. This was there for a reason...






        share|improve this answer












        Remember that these systems (not only the Osborne 1) didn't have harddisks. Everything ran from floppies.



        So usually you had one floppy where the program was on, together with OS related files. And another floppy for your data, texts and so on.



        That was workable with two drives, but still was impractical if you wanted to copy data. Usually there was some way to load a program and then use the first drive for a second data disk while doing the copying, but then you had to re-insert the system disk etc. So a third drive wouldn't have been too bad (but few systems had one).



        TL;DR: You could never have enough floppy drives. Working with one floppy drive was a pain sometimes because you often had to switch disks; working with two was enough for most cases; and sometimes more than two would have been nice.



        The same was true for other systems like the DEC PDP-8, which used DEC tapes pretty much the same way floppies were used on CP/M systems. And there were tape controllers which allowed for four tape drives. This was there for a reason...







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 5 hours ago









        dirkt

        8,56312345




        8,56312345












        • I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
          – Brian H
          14 mins ago


















        • I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
          – Brian H
          14 mins ago
















        I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
        – Brian H
        14 mins ago




        I'd say the same thing is true for any floppy-based micro I've ever used. You needed two floppy drives for usability either as a boot disk+data disk setup, or for when you were making backups. One disk floppy systems were far less convenient for real work, but fine if you just booted games.
        – Brian H
        14 mins ago










        up vote
        2
        down vote













        Note CP/M (the Operating system of the Osborne) didn't have subdirectories as we know today (which more or less forced you to dedicate a disk for a specific purpose in order to keep the overview), it also had very limited storage capacity per disk drive (~180k on a SS/SD disk as on the Osborne 1).



        That means you typically held the application (for example WordStar, with a typical disk footprint of ~50-60kBytes) on one drive on a write-protected disk (in case it had to load overlays or messages) and the actual text you were working on on a disk in the other drive (the working disk). If you didn't want to be forced to constantly swap disks, you also put the operating system files on your program disk which also took some of the capacity.



        You could have worked with only one drive, but that was much more cumbersome and carried the risk of destroying your program disk (because that could not be write-protected, then) or you had to change disks occasionally.



        Obviously copying between disks was much simpler with a 2-drive setup, as others have mentioned.






        share|improve this answer



























          up vote
          2
          down vote













          Note CP/M (the Operating system of the Osborne) didn't have subdirectories as we know today (which more or less forced you to dedicate a disk for a specific purpose in order to keep the overview), it also had very limited storage capacity per disk drive (~180k on a SS/SD disk as on the Osborne 1).



          That means you typically held the application (for example WordStar, with a typical disk footprint of ~50-60kBytes) on one drive on a write-protected disk (in case it had to load overlays or messages) and the actual text you were working on on a disk in the other drive (the working disk). If you didn't want to be forced to constantly swap disks, you also put the operating system files on your program disk which also took some of the capacity.



          You could have worked with only one drive, but that was much more cumbersome and carried the risk of destroying your program disk (because that could not be write-protected, then) or you had to change disks occasionally.



          Obviously copying between disks was much simpler with a 2-drive setup, as others have mentioned.






          share|improve this answer

























            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            Note CP/M (the Operating system of the Osborne) didn't have subdirectories as we know today (which more or less forced you to dedicate a disk for a specific purpose in order to keep the overview), it also had very limited storage capacity per disk drive (~180k on a SS/SD disk as on the Osborne 1).



            That means you typically held the application (for example WordStar, with a typical disk footprint of ~50-60kBytes) on one drive on a write-protected disk (in case it had to load overlays or messages) and the actual text you were working on on a disk in the other drive (the working disk). If you didn't want to be forced to constantly swap disks, you also put the operating system files on your program disk which also took some of the capacity.



            You could have worked with only one drive, but that was much more cumbersome and carried the risk of destroying your program disk (because that could not be write-protected, then) or you had to change disks occasionally.



            Obviously copying between disks was much simpler with a 2-drive setup, as others have mentioned.






            share|improve this answer














            Note CP/M (the Operating system of the Osborne) didn't have subdirectories as we know today (which more or less forced you to dedicate a disk for a specific purpose in order to keep the overview), it also had very limited storage capacity per disk drive (~180k on a SS/SD disk as on the Osborne 1).



            That means you typically held the application (for example WordStar, with a typical disk footprint of ~50-60kBytes) on one drive on a write-protected disk (in case it had to load overlays or messages) and the actual text you were working on on a disk in the other drive (the working disk). If you didn't want to be forced to constantly swap disks, you also put the operating system files on your program disk which also took some of the capacity.



            You could have worked with only one drive, but that was much more cumbersome and carried the risk of destroying your program disk (because that could not be write-protected, then) or you had to change disks occasionally.



            Obviously copying between disks was much simpler with a 2-drive setup, as others have mentioned.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 4 hours ago

























            answered 4 hours ago









            tofro

            14.2k32980




            14.2k32980






















                up vote
                0
                down vote













                Since the computer only has disk drives and no hard-disk, the normal usage was to have the system programs and a word processor or database handler on one diskette and using the other for data or documents.
                Those drives were single side, single density as standard, which gave a storage capacity of somewhere around 100 kBytes each.






                share|improve this answer

























                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  Since the computer only has disk drives and no hard-disk, the normal usage was to have the system programs and a word processor or database handler on one diskette and using the other for data or documents.
                  Those drives were single side, single density as standard, which gave a storage capacity of somewhere around 100 kBytes each.






                  share|improve this answer























                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote









                    Since the computer only has disk drives and no hard-disk, the normal usage was to have the system programs and a word processor or database handler on one diskette and using the other for data or documents.
                    Those drives were single side, single density as standard, which gave a storage capacity of somewhere around 100 kBytes each.






                    share|improve this answer












                    Since the computer only has disk drives and no hard-disk, the normal usage was to have the system programs and a word processor or database handler on one diskette and using the other for data or documents.
                    Those drives were single side, single density as standard, which gave a storage capacity of somewhere around 100 kBytes each.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 5 hours ago









                    UncleBod

                    566110




                    566110






















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        The Osborne 1, like many computers of the time, had no means of data storage other than floppy disks. On powering up, the user would be prompted to insert the operating system disk, so the machine could boot.



                        Even when running other software, the computer would need to access and run parts of the OS periodically. If you only had one floppy drive, you'd have to continuously eject and insert the OS disk and your data disk when running some commands. It was far more desirable to have two drives available, so the OS disk could be left in one drive for most of the time.



                        Having two floppy drives also speeds up copying files between different disks, but this is a secondary benefit.



                        The provision of two floppy drives was also common with other machines, such as the IBM PC and the BBC Micro (though the latter had its OS in a ROM on the motherboard). When hard drives were installed in computers, the OS could be installed there, and there was no longer such a benefit from having a second floppy drive.






                        share|improve this answer





















                        • Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
                          – supercat
                          5 hours ago










                        • @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
                          – alephzero
                          5 hours ago












                        • @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
                          – supercat
                          4 hours ago

















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        The Osborne 1, like many computers of the time, had no means of data storage other than floppy disks. On powering up, the user would be prompted to insert the operating system disk, so the machine could boot.



                        Even when running other software, the computer would need to access and run parts of the OS periodically. If you only had one floppy drive, you'd have to continuously eject and insert the OS disk and your data disk when running some commands. It was far more desirable to have two drives available, so the OS disk could be left in one drive for most of the time.



                        Having two floppy drives also speeds up copying files between different disks, but this is a secondary benefit.



                        The provision of two floppy drives was also common with other machines, such as the IBM PC and the BBC Micro (though the latter had its OS in a ROM on the motherboard). When hard drives were installed in computers, the OS could be installed there, and there was no longer such a benefit from having a second floppy drive.






                        share|improve this answer





















                        • Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
                          – supercat
                          5 hours ago










                        • @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
                          – alephzero
                          5 hours ago












                        • @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
                          – supercat
                          4 hours ago















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote










                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote









                        The Osborne 1, like many computers of the time, had no means of data storage other than floppy disks. On powering up, the user would be prompted to insert the operating system disk, so the machine could boot.



                        Even when running other software, the computer would need to access and run parts of the OS periodically. If you only had one floppy drive, you'd have to continuously eject and insert the OS disk and your data disk when running some commands. It was far more desirable to have two drives available, so the OS disk could be left in one drive for most of the time.



                        Having two floppy drives also speeds up copying files between different disks, but this is a secondary benefit.



                        The provision of two floppy drives was also common with other machines, such as the IBM PC and the BBC Micro (though the latter had its OS in a ROM on the motherboard). When hard drives were installed in computers, the OS could be installed there, and there was no longer such a benefit from having a second floppy drive.






                        share|improve this answer












                        The Osborne 1, like many computers of the time, had no means of data storage other than floppy disks. On powering up, the user would be prompted to insert the operating system disk, so the machine could boot.



                        Even when running other software, the computer would need to access and run parts of the OS periodically. If you only had one floppy drive, you'd have to continuously eject and insert the OS disk and your data disk when running some commands. It was far more desirable to have two drives available, so the OS disk could be left in one drive for most of the time.



                        Having two floppy drives also speeds up copying files between different disks, but this is a secondary benefit.



                        The provision of two floppy drives was also common with other machines, such as the IBM PC and the BBC Micro (though the latter had its OS in a ROM on the motherboard). When hard drives were installed in computers, the OS could be installed there, and there was no longer such a benefit from having a second floppy drive.







                        share|improve this answer












                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer










                        answered 5 hours ago









                        Kaz

                        1464




                        1464












                        • Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
                          – supercat
                          5 hours ago










                        • @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
                          – alephzero
                          5 hours ago












                        • @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
                          – supercat
                          4 hours ago




















                        • Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
                          – supercat
                          5 hours ago










                        • @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
                          – alephzero
                          5 hours ago












                        • @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
                          – supercat
                          4 hours ago


















                        Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
                        – supercat
                        5 hours ago




                        Why would a machine of that error need to access the OS while running a program? Reloading the command-prompt handler after exiting would be commonplace, but if part of the OS got displaced by another program, it wouldn't be able to reload until that program gave up the memory, which wouldn't usually happen until that program exited.
                        – supercat
                        5 hours ago












                        @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
                        – alephzero
                        5 hours ago






                        @supercat Just as now, an "OS" like CP/M included a collection of stand-alone utility programs as well as the permanently resident code. If you wanted to use CPM's "PIP" to copy a file from one disk to another on a single-drive system, you would have to (1) insert the CPM disk to start PIP (2) insert the first data disk to read a chunk of data into memory (3) insert the second data disk to write the data (4) repeat steps 2 and 3 till done. The probability of "user error" was not small! With two drives, you only needed to do one disk change. to swap the OS disk for one of the data disks.
                        – alephzero
                        5 hours ago














                        @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
                        – supercat
                        4 hours ago






                        @alephzero: When copying data from one disk to another, having two drives was better than one, obviously. My issue was with the first sentence of the second paragraph. If a program wanted to use PIP to copy a file, it would need to save its state and arrange things so that when PIP exited, the disk in the first drive would contain a file with a certain special name whose last block contained a command to re-run the original program and have it reload its state. Were there any programs that went through that rigmarole to use PIP rather than simply using their own internal copy-file code?
                        – supercat
                        4 hours ago












                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Most business computers of that time had two floppy drives, and the Osbourne was entirely unexceptional in this regard.



                        Apple II (By Rama, CC BY-SA 2.0 fr)
                        enter image description here



                        IBM PC (By Ruben de Rijcke - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0)



                        enter image description here






                        share|improve this answer

























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Most business computers of that time had two floppy drives, and the Osbourne was entirely unexceptional in this regard.



                          Apple II (By Rama, CC BY-SA 2.0 fr)
                          enter image description here



                          IBM PC (By Ruben de Rijcke - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0)



                          enter image description here






                          share|improve this answer























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            Most business computers of that time had two floppy drives, and the Osbourne was entirely unexceptional in this regard.



                            Apple II (By Rama, CC BY-SA 2.0 fr)
                            enter image description here



                            IBM PC (By Ruben de Rijcke - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0)



                            enter image description here






                            share|improve this answer












                            Most business computers of that time had two floppy drives, and the Osbourne was entirely unexceptional in this regard.



                            Apple II (By Rama, CC BY-SA 2.0 fr)
                            enter image description here



                            IBM PC (By Ruben de Rijcke - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0)



                            enter image description here







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered 4 hours ago









                            jonathanjo

                            2413




                            2413






















                                QueenSvetlana is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                                draft saved

                                draft discarded


















                                QueenSvetlana is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                                QueenSvetlana is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                                QueenSvetlana is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                                Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f8405%2fpurpose-of-2-disk-drives-on-the-osbourne-1%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                A CLEAN and SIMPLE way to add appendices to Table of Contents and bookmarks

                                Calculate evaluation metrics using cross_val_predict sklearn

                                Insert data from modal to MySQL (multiple modal on website)