Teleget [ Chuck(G) ]

[ardent-blue]

Chuck(G), there are a few PS/2 related disk images in the *.TG0 format.

Can you illuminate our lives by explaining HOW that format was chosen AT THAT TIME, and What/Why IBM moved to LOADDSKF?

Rummaging about on Sybex. Noticed the Teleget stuff, there is at least one *.TD0 diskette for an early PS/2, not sure which...

http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohlandl/utils/utilities.html
Teleget Expand *.TG0 files

25start.tg0 IBM PS/2 MOD 25 starter diskette v1.0
rs25286a.tg0 PS/2 Model 25-286 Starter disk - V1.00

 

[Chuck(G)]

Please, it's Sydex. Sybex published real books on paper.

Long time ago, but my recollection is that Tulip and a few other vendors wanted to distribute image files and wanted to keep them unique and resistant to casual hacking. TG is basically a receive-only version of Teledisk, but with very basic hashing unique to a vendor. Somewhere I've got a list of keys and vendors; but recall that I have had nothing to do with the whole affair for more than 20 years. AFAICR, the teleget binaries were distributed without any licensing requirements. So, file extensions and encoding vary with the vendor.

 

[ardent-blue]

...unique and resistant to casual hacking. TG is basically a receive-only version of Teledisk, but with very basic hashing unique to a vendor. ... nothing to do with the whole affair for more than 20 years. AFAICR, the teleget binaries were distributed without any licensing requirements.

I am sure that IBM's reasons are in a vault in a third sub-basement of a forgotten facility and the entrance was walled over with sheet rock and everyone re-assigned.

So, at that time, why did Teleget get the nod? What properties did Teledisk offer over period archivers?

To wind up, if I want to be byslexic, I'll do that.

PS. So IBM's Teleget works only with IBM archives?

 

[Chuck(G)]

Answer of why IBM teleget: As best as I can recall, it was because IBM had a few disks that didn't conform to standard 512-byte sector layout; i.e. there were intentional quirks in it. It was such a brief episode that I don't recall details. But, relatively speaking, customized TG/TD was fairly popular with some customers; more so than the simpler disk self-extractor used for the IBM PS/2 diskettes (also one of our products).

As to the uniqueness, I'd have to do some digging to answer that--you'll have to make finding that truffle worthwhile to this old dog.

This all gets very blurry, considering that the diskette products weren't even our main business during that time. (A free glass of cider to anyone who can name what that was--as well as our most popular product).

 

[ardent-blue]

Chuck, I look for why things happened, others have replicated and commented Teleget, but they don't seem to mention WHY.

"IBM had a few disks that didn't conform to standard 512-byte sector layout; i.e. there were intentional quirks in it."

Oh, really? Do tell.

"simpler disk self-extractor used for the IBM PS/2 diskettes (also one of our products)"

Is this the infamous LOADDSKF?

Great deeds were done in the dark, never to be known by mortal men...

 

[Chuck(G)]

No, obviously you'd never visited the IBM PCC BBS, but other divisions used our diskette self-extractor for both DOS and OS/2. The Teleget thing was special; it was required, but I don't recall the reason. Too long ago--and I'm not going to go digging through years of correspondence without some tangible motivation. IBM had a 10 year license for that--and they didn't renew.

But again, diskettes weren't our moneymaker during that time. So guess again. Many of the folks who would know the answer are either long retired or deceased.