I have the sense this has been argued over here before, but can someone summarize why the desire for floppy images? or disk images? and not a desire for FIAD?
I'm working on a TIFILES based FIAD DSR. I'd like to know what the barrier is to transitioning to FIAD? Is it just conversion time? Would FIAD be adopted if conversion was automated?
We know that many challenges can be overcome as proved by Classic99 and the HDX device.
Personally, if FIAD over ethernet/wifi was available, even without disk image support, I would certainly find it extremely useful. However, there are still some advantages to images when it comes to programs that require disk or sector access, or particular filenames, stringent disk# / path.filename limitations, or low-level access beyond simply opening/reading/writing/deleting. (and in the case of the Geneve, sector-based IO is the foundation of the entire DSR).
Since there is quite a lot of existing software in disk images, an automated conversion might be helpful. Also, if the TI-based DSR could mount a different host folder as a FIAD disk (1-9) through a CALL or subprogram, that might ease a transition. I personally wouldn't want to manage the file structure on the PC every time I wanted a different program to respond as DSK1.
MESS/MAME use disk images exclusively so for me they are logical and necessary. Of course, if a new FIAD device were to materialize, I suspect it could be emulated