GCC HyperDrive 20 (in Mac 512k) Photos — #25

Post #25 by JDW

Source Forum	GCC HyperDrive 20 (in Mac 512k) Photos — #25
Category	Troubleshooting
Post Date	Sat, 21 Jan 2012 - 22:49
Original URL	https://68kmla.org/bb/threads/gcc-hyperdrive-20-in-mac-512k-photos.8586/

Post

Mac128 and Gorgonops, thank you for the interesting discussion on IDE. However, as I have repeatedly said throughout this thread to everyone who has brought up that ST-506 drive, the drive mechanism used in my HyperDrive Mac512 is NOT an ST-506. The drive case is different. The controller is different. Again, go to my previous post in this thread and examine every single photo. Peer closely at the circuit board components. Now consider the name "MMI — Microcomputer Memories Inc." There is an absolute dearth of info on that company, with the exception of this LA Times article that says they were 3 years old as of August 1985:

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-08-13/business/fi-1562_1_net-loss

And here is what my GCC HyperDrive Dealer friend told me a few days ago:

I was involved during the peak period circa 1985-86. I knew that they went-on after me but for how long who knows. I assumed that the release of the external drive was the end of the line. When I saw your design I knew it was different than the iterations I had seen. In particular the simplified drive mounting chassis (which appeared to achieve the same thing with fewer manufacturing steps) and the the full CPU access through an expansion connector on the controller card lead me to think that maybe this is what the hyperdrive had evolved to as they made preparation for the 2000 integration/rollout. The fact that the board was a 512K board only in physical layout was explained to me by the fact that it indeed said 512 and therefore maybe they had two unique boards for the 512 and plus solutions. If I had seen for example that you had case labeling with red in the logos or using an acrylic bubble or early graphics then that would have immediately shook me out of my funk and it would have clicked. There was just enough details in the technical photos to indicate change with no case photos to clearly date it. My mistake.
However, it wasn't until I looked at a 2.0 board with the fully contoured back edges to deal with the SIMMs of the Plus and the revisions of the components on your board that it finally began to click. I was correct that your machine bookended my experience with the series, but since the majority of the unknown to me was after I left computer servicing, I had incorrectly assumed it was there that it belonged.

Actually your board predates everything I have. The design is similar to my 512K only v1.1, but still not the same. The components are earlier and the firmware earlier. Even the v1.1 setup has a nearly completely enclosed drive chassis that makes routing the analog and hard and floppy drive cables a pain. It's quite a bit more rigid and likely shielded but I'm not sure what problem they were trying to solve. I don't think it was the cause of their drive failures, but evidently somebody did because it costs money to make production changes like that. As you know your drive setup is flipped 180 degrees with a shortest path route.

So you have my collection beat for date to the marketplace I have no parts like it.

Details surrounding the drive mechanism I have are still a mystery. But clearly, my drive mechanism is not an ST-506. Any insights or history on the specific drive mechanism that I have would be appreciated.