cm0002@piefed.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 1 month agoFeel old yet?lemmy.mlimagemessage-square63linkfedilinkarrow-up1849 cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1849imageFeel old yet?lemmy.mlcm0002@piefed.world to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square63linkfedilink cross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squarenyan@lemmy.cafelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 month agoNah, I’d end up explaining why floppy discs weren’t floppy, instead, and let the younger folks explain the CDs.
minus-squareu/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·1 month agoThey were floppy though? At least 8 inch, and 5.25 inch. 3.5 only on the inside (unless enough force is applied xD).
minus-squarenyan@lemmy.cafelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 month agoThe larger ones were flexible, not floppy—they could be bent without cracking the casing, but wouldn’t just bend under their own weight.
minus-squareleftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 month agoIf you held them by a side and shaked them, they were definitely floppy.
Nah, I’d end up explaining why floppy discs weren’t floppy, instead, and let the younger folks explain the CDs.
They were floppy though?
At least 8 inch, and 5.25 inch. 3.5 only on the inside (unless enough force is applied xD).
By 3.5" you ofc mean:
/s
The larger ones were flexible, not floppy—they could be bent without cracking the casing, but wouldn’t just bend under their own weight.
If you held them by a side and shaked them, they were definitely floppy.