RLL does have 1.5x the density of MFM encoding, however – therefor, when
you have an RLL drive, you are going to have 1.5 x the miber of sectors
given the same rotational speed – Right?
1) If one chose to keep the same sector size, there would be 50% more sectors
per track.
2) If one chose to increase the size of the sectors, then the number of
sectors per track would not necessarily increase by 50%.
The above should be considered to be in the range of conjecture. I don't
really know how disks are structured at that level. Do they put more
sectors on, increase the size of the sectors, or what? Certainly the extra
data has to go SOMEWHERE! But where? <Shrug>
(BTW, I thought it was interesting that my reference said storage went up
by *60%*, not 50%.)