• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Option Board Replacement

G

Great Hierophant

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
1,928
Location
Massachusetts, USA
I really think the time has come for a replacement for the Central Point Option Boards for the IBM PC. Here are the most important features a replacement should have :

Works with double density and high density drives. (Deluxe)

Emulates "laser burned hole" protection. (Enhanced)

ISA and PCI support. (edge connectors on both edges)

Read and write HD protected images.

CPU and system speed independent.

Better reading algorithms to dump damaged media or media that is unreadable through an ordinary controller.

Properly read DD images in HD drives.

The software should be as easy to use as possible so that the user should not need more than one version of it to get his backups working. The disk images created should be in a format that will allow later writing to a disk.

It should also have software and tools designed for the PC, not the C64, Apple II, Amiga, ST, TRS, CoCo, Mac, TI, or 400/800/XL/XE. Specific protections should be targeted like SuperLok, ProLock, Cops Copylock II, Lock-It-Up, NeverLock and the like.

Most importantly, this has to be something that can be done at a reasonable price level. No need for extra features like the catweasel that include sockets for SID chips.

Personally, I would be satisfied with an 8-bit ISA board the replicates the original CopyIIPC Option Board (the TTL versions). I am basing this on the assumption that all copy protected games came on double density disks and that none of them used laser burned holes (no one has ever identified a game that uses that protection). No need for the features of the Enhanced board or the Deluxe board.
 
Well, it's mostly a matter of software. Nowadays, the hardware's pretty easy (CPU power is cheap). But why ISA or PCI? Just make it self-contained and USB.

And don't forget Phil Pemberton's DiskFerret--not exactly what you want, but probably could be adapted for the purpose--with software.
 
Hi!

I wish you the best of luck with your project. Maybe it can take off like the XT-IDE and AT2XTKBD projects did. I've tried on a few occasions with similar community development projects here and on CCTALK but without much success. It seems XT-IDE was that one time we were able to "catch the lightning in a bottle" and hopefully we can reproduce those results with other projects.

My personal opinion on how to make a successful project is to keep it simple. Don't let the technical requirements run away and keep the goals acchievable. Start with a simple ISA TTL design and maybe a simple microcontroller and work up from there. If you start with some cosmic super duper board that does everything for everyone it will end up fizzling since no one can make the design meet expectations.

Good luck! Thanks and have a nice day!

Andrew Lynch
 
USB is certainly feasible and would help keep the costs down, but possibly bulkier in attaching the drive.

While there is the CopyIIPC and Snatchit route, or other software, it just isn't a proper solution to the problem. Due to the disk controller's design, these products may not be able to read and certainly cannot write all the flux transitions required to make the copy protection work. Some protections will need to be cracked with software like noguard. This is not acceptable from a preservationist perspective.
 
So are you going to make this super board or asking someone else to do it?

If you are getting ready to release a prototype or go to production please put me down for one!

Thanks and have a nice day!

Andrew Lynch
 
If you read over the various other projects of this type (e.g. Catweasel), you'll find that there's a lot of belly-aching about the lack of software to do disks from <fill in the blank>. Remember that the Deluxe Option Board even handled the encoding and file system for Mac 400K and 800K floppies (which was why a lot of people bought them--I don't think they could have sold many without that feature). 1.44M media and being acquired killed off the whole Option Board product line; there were other software-only packages that could get around (mostly by patching and intercepting BIOS calls) most of the other common PC copy-protection schemes--and Windows 9x killed off most of the rest.

But, as I said, the hardware for doing an Option Board-type of thing is almost trivial. It's the software that will kill you. Be prepared for complaints that you don't handle 64-bit Windows 7 hosts, some flavors of Linux and Mac OSX...

OTOH, if you're just looking for an Option Board, I've got a 1987-ish one, in box with manuals and software that I'll part with for $25+shipping (It's not a DOB, however).
 
There's no good reason not to handle 64-bit these days if you're handling the 32-bit variants of the same operating system - you can even force a 32-bit driver to install on a 64-bit OS (most people would tell you it's not possible, but I've done it several times - it does involve some tinkering..), so as long as you code well (the driver doesn't care where it is in memory, and plays nicely with all of the APIs) you can re-use the exact same driver even. As for signing, you can sign with a bullshit certificate (or skip it all together) and just have the user(s) enable testsigning or disable driver signature enforcement. I do both just as a rule so I don't run into crap with the silly restrictions.
 
Raven said:
There's no good reason not to handle 64-bit these days if you're handling the 32-bit variants of the same operating system - you can even force a 32-bit driver to install on a 64-bit OS (most people would tell you it's not possible, but I've done it several times - it does involve some tinkering..), so as long as you code well (the driver doesn't care where it is in memory, and plays nicely with all of the APIs) you can re-use the exact same driver even. As for signing, you can sign with a bullshit certificate (or skip it all together) and just have the user(s) enable testsigning or disable driver signature enforcement. I do both just as a rule so I don't run into crap with the silly restrictions.
Click to expand...

Okay, Raven--I'll leave the coding to you. :) You do realize that people will also want versions for DOS, AOS, OSX, Windows NT 3.1, Windows 3.x, 9x, Linux and just about anything else that will run on a system made since 1985?
 
Raven said:
There's no good reason not to handle 64-bit these days if you're handling the 32-bit variants of the same operating system - you can even force a 32-bit driver to install on a 64-bit OS (most people would tell you it's not possible, but I've done it several times - it does involve some tinkering..), so as long as you code well (the driver doesn't care where it is in memory, and plays nicely with all of the APIs) you can re-use the exact same driver even. As for signing, you can sign with a bullshit certificate (or skip it all together) and just have the user(s) enable testsigning or disable driver signature enforcement. I do both just as a rule so I don't run into crap with the silly restrictions.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are talking about loading 32-bit Windows kernel mode driver binaries in a 64-bit Windows environment. Sure, the source code should be the same between 32-bit and 64-bit, just build 32-bit and 64-bit Windows kernel mode binaries from the same source. But the built binaries are not cross compatible between 32-bit and 64-bit.
 
Glen, now you perhaps understand why I said "USB". At least the interface part comes down to a minidriver on Windows.

You do realize, that as soon as you've done this, you'll get someone asking why you don't do one with a Thunderbolt interface...
 
I also use Trans Copy Option Board on 440BX ISA/PCI board for Pentium II/III.

I saw the KryoFlux site a few days ago.

http://www.kryoflux.com/

According to Kryoflux, it supports various disk format via USB port.

I still don't have one, I don't know this FDC supports to dump copy protected sector.
I hope it is helpful to refer the make any FDC of various format.
 
Last edited:
Great Hierophant said:
Can cp2 files take advantage of the opton board?
Click to expand...

There is no compatibility with Option Board.
It must be used with Snatchit & Copy II PC on slower (older) PC under 80286 based CPU.
An Image format for Trans Copy Option Board is not standard disk image.
 
Chuck(G) said:
Okay, Raven--I'll leave the coding to you. :) You do realize that people will also want versions for DOS, AOS, OSX, Windows NT 3.1, Windows 3.x, 9x, Linux and just about anything else that will run on a system made since 1985?
Click to expand...


Hey Chuck, don't worry so much. This sounds trivially easy and it should be done in a week ... or two... tops!

:)

Andrew Lynch
 
Having obtained a regular, non-Deluxe Option Board, there is a serious problem with it. Transcopy's last version for the regular Option Board was 4.7 to the best of my knowledge. Transcopy versions 5.x work only with the Deluxe board. Distribution becomes difficult because someone who used Transcopy version 5.4, as is recommended, to make images may hear that those images will not write properly for someone who can only use 4.x software. So, for distribution purposes, it would seem best to use the 4.7 version.

The shame is evident in that the Deluxe Option Board really does not offer much of real value these days. Since any Option Board can only read from double density media, writing to high density media simply adds one thing more that could go wrong with the duplication process. Protection schemes made for double density media may not work correctly on high density media. I understand that double density drives can be expensive and double density media simply is not commonplace anymore, but a true preservationist should acquire nothing less. As for the Macintosh compatibility, which has been said to have been very important back in the day, must probably seem less impressive than Macintosh copying hardware and software.

Even still, the Option Boards have three advantages over Kryoflux and other devices that cannot be overestimated. Number One, it can write to disks. By this, not only preservation but restoration is also possible. Other products are only useful with emulators, this actually has some real vintage use. Number two, they are PC-centric, not Apple-centric, Commodore-centric, Atari-centric or Tandy-centric. Third, the software is really easy to use.
 
Last edited:
I appear to be promoting the kryoflux today ;-) but it does "do everything" regarding floppy discs.

In a nutshell it samples the magentic transitions straight out of the drive at the lowest possible level, at very high resolution. It squirts that data feed to the PC that decodes the format (if you want) entirely in software.
You can reverse the process and hence basically write absolutely anything you want, including any sort of protection or format (including e.g. varispeed mac discs, any amiga disk (even the most heavily protected; an early success was 'Dragon's Lair') etc,etc.

The catweasel works on similar lines but is an older design and uses a PCI card.

You have effectively perfect (in floppy terms) hardware for sampling and replay of the low level disk bits, anything you want to do is just a Simple Matter Of Programming.

The Kryo guys were mostly focussed on reading/archiving formats properly, but have recently added write support.

Because they don't make floppies any more, I can confidently say that Kryo will read+write any known floppy format (assuming you can blow the dust out of the drive)

..ok except the crazy things like 120MB "floptical discs" .. the hardware will read/write any disk format* up to and including HD (1us bitcell) floppies.

*Like really, anything. Hard-sectored 8" disks, 5.25", 3", C64 flippy discs, Apple GCR, whatever you have.
 
Last edited:
DrTune said:
Because they don't make floppies any more, I can confidently say that Kryo will read+write any known floppy format (assuming you can blow the dust out of the drive)

..ok except the crazy things like 120MB "floptical discs" .. the hardware will read/write any disk format* up to and including HD (1us bitcell) floppies.

*Like really, anything. Hard-sectored 8" disks, 5.25", 3", C64 flippy discs, Apple GCR, whatever you have.
Click to expand...

Really? So my 6MB Drivetek 5.25" floppies will sail right through? Cool.

But I've already mentioned that any modern microcontroller with sufficient RAM can do the same job on floppies--ATMega, ARM, heck, maybe even a PIC. It's not rocket science.

The trick soon is going to be finding drives to handle the stuff. Say, something to handle those Memorex 651 8" floppies, or my stack of 3¼" Dysan floppies.
 
DrTune said:
I appear to be promoting the kryoflux today ;-) but it does "do everything" regarding floppy discs.

The Kryo guys were mostly focussed on reading/archiving formats properly, but have recently added write support.

Because they don't make floppies any more, I can confidently say that Kryo will read+write any known floppy format (assuming you can blow the dust out of the drive)

..ok except the crazy things like 120MB "floptical discs" .. the hardware will read/write any disk format* up to and including HD (1us bitcell) floppies.
Click to expand...

I did not know that the KryoFlux team had implemented write support. They should really update their site more often. Now this becomes a most intriguing solution.
 
Great Hierophant said:
I did not know that the KryoFlux team had implemented write support. They should really update their site more often. Now this becomes a most intriguing solution.
Click to expand...

I second that... DrTune, can you provide us with more information on the write procedures? Last that I looked at the website, writing back data was a long way off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top