had it with DirectCD

Is there any product that performs a function similar to DirectCD but which
is reliable? I'm running version 3.05 under Win98SE.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California
33° 27' 59"N, 117° 05' 53"W

In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications are
not the best way of putting data on discs.

--

Graham Mayor





Curtis Croulet wrote:
Is there any product that performs a function similar to DirectCD but
which is reliable? I'm running version 3.05 under Win98SE.

.. -------------------------------------------
how HUGE are your BALLS, Adrian Miller?
-------------------------------------------
Only a trashy company like Roxio or Adaptec
let loosed in Usenet this utter trash
-------------------------------------------
Deirdre Straughan (Roxio) is a LIAR
-----------------------------------
Mike Richter is a LIAR
----------------------

Curtis Croulet wrote:

Is there any product that performs a function similar to DirectCD but which
is reliable? I'm running version 3.05 under Win98SE.

Sonic DLA:
http://sonic.com/products/dla/default.asp

' -------------------------------------------
Graham Mayor (MS MVP), were you also born
with "Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
-------------------------------------------
(Does the "P" in MVP stand for "PRICK"?)
(Does MS stand for "Mikey S-licker"?)


Graham Mayor (MS MVP) peep-squeaked:

In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications are
not the best way of putting data on discs.

Are the faults now with DirectCD, not with the packet "format"?

Graham Mayor (7/31/04):

Direct CD is arguably the best of its type,
but it is up against a flaky and unreliable type of format

Is the packet format now robust and reliable, Graham Mayor (MS MVP)?

How did that happen? Do MS MVPs no longer go around and **** on any
packets they find?

Do MS MVPs now know the distinction between Standard and Implementation?

=========================================
Mike Richter on Packet Writing Format (i)
=========================================

"the fault is not with the software but with the format"

( Graham Mayor (MS MVP) not only swallowed the above cockamamie )
( hook, line and sinker, but actively spreads the garbage! )

==============================
From: Mike Richter
Date: 12/15/01
Subject: Files Disappeared From CDRW DIsc.......

Suddenly i find myself among those who are having BIG problems
with Roxios crappy software, after a reasonable amount of small
problems with it, i insert a cdrw with files on it (jpegs) and
tried to burn a few more onto it only to find Roxio software
thinks it is either, corrupted, unrecognized data or need
formatting(?)

only one file remains on the disc, the others are GONE.

My guess is that you used DCD and you have now joined
the crowd of users who have learned that

fixed-length packets are the least reliable and
most fragile format you can write to CD.

Incidentally, the fault is not with the software but with
the format and the medium.
==============================

-----------------------------------
Does MS stand for "Mikey S-licker"?
-----------------------------------

--------------------------------------
Does the "P" in MVP stand for "PRICK"?
--------------------------------------

In article , says...
In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications are
not the best way of putting data on discs.



I would re-word that to read:

Of all available resources, packet writing in any of its implementations, is
the worst possible way to store any information you wish to be able to use in
the future.

Keep in mind at all times that CDrs and CDRws (I dont use the re-writables
anymore myself) are NOT BIG FLOPPIES and shouldn't be used with software that
treats them as if they were.

The very best packet writing software is simply the best of a bad lot, and
should be avoided.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm... bubbanews.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com

( No Pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a LIBEL )
( -- despite Mikey claimed to have proof of misquotes !! )


Larry wrote:

Graham Mayor (Pipsqueak) peep-squeaked:
In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications are
not the best way of putting data on discs.


I would re-word that to read:

Of all available resources, packet writing in any of its implementations, is
the worst possible way to store any information you wish to be able to use in
the future.

Keep in mind at all times that CDrs and CDRws (I dont use the re-writables
anymore myself) are NOT BIG FLOPPIES and shouldn't be used with software that
treats them as if they were.

The very best packet writing software is simply the best of a bad lot, and
should be avoided.

Imagine Larry bucking Mikey:

=======================
From: Mike Richter (Acraptec ****)
Subject: A note on Take Two
Date: 9/1/99

For Take Two to work IDEALLY, your drive must support
packet writing and you must have DCD installed...to do it.

You may back up ... to a DCD-formatted erasable.
=======================

Imagine for Take Two, supposedly a backup software, to work IDEALLY,
it must use supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, faulty, unreliable
packet writing format!

Moreover, the supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, faulty, unreliable
packet writing format was good enough for BACKUP, even when combined
with supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, forgetful, unreliable cd-rw
media!

And:
======================
From: Mike Richter (Roxio ****)
Date: 4/18/03

There is no separate DCD product any longer;
it was integrated with ECDC when TakeTwo made that necessary.
======================

And:
http://www.roxio.com/en/support/t2/t2vhist.html#1.02+
"Because of the tight coupling of Take Two and DirectCD ..."

Take Two is supposed to be a BACKUP software, yet it's "tightly coupled"
to supposedly flaky, unreliable, etc., packet writing!

Graham Mayor wrote:
In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications are
not the best way of putting data on discs.

You are a bit hard on packet writing. I've had no trouble with
variable-length packets; writing, reliability and reading have all been
flawless. Of course, fixed-length is another matter.

Unfortunately, InCD implements only fixed-length; I've found that it
writes no better than DCD and that in both cases your observations are
accurate.

There have been other UDF programs, but most (all?) have been either
renamed versions of DCD or InCD; or have vanished due to lack of interest.

Mike
--

http://www.mrichter.com/

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)


Mike Richter (Roxio ****) splattered:

Graham Mayor (Mikey S-licker) peep-squeaked:

In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications are
not the best way of putting data on discs.

You are a bit hard on packet writing. I've had no trouble with
variable-length packets; writing, reliability and reading have all been
flawless.

Of course, that's based on your "enough" experience with CD-R:

======================
From: Mike Richter (Slimy ****)
Subject: UDF, Packet Writing, and Backups
Date: 4/28/01

I have not had enough experience with UDF 1.5 on a write-once disc
to have an opinion on that.
======================

Of course, there is no problem with DirectCD and CD-R since Mikey did
not have trouble:

===================
From: (GMAN) === Ex cRoxio/Acraptec Beta Tester
Date: 2/21/02

Windows 2000 Cannot Read CD-R Discs Created with DirectCD
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=268094

Well then it doesn't conform to UDF standards.
Why doesn't someone sue them for false advertising?

Why the F%^k are you using CDR's with UDF in the first place?

UDF and packet writing software were meant for CDRW to begin with.
===================

Why didn't you correct GMAN, Mikey?


Of course, fixed-length is another matter.

Do you know where the "format" come from?
Do you know the distinction between Standard and Implementation?

--------------
Howard Kaikow:

Why the hell cant anyone produce reliable packet writing software
(and I dont mean the flaws in the format) but the software itself?

The problem is not the format, it is the inept implementation of
the standards.
--------------

Unfortunately, InCD implements only fixed-length; I've found that it
writes no better than DCD and that in both cases your observations are
accurate.

"Unfortunately"? Bet it ate your heart out!

Anyhow, is it now softwares' fault?

======================
From: Mike Richter (Roxio ****)
Date: 6/19/03

most of those who have written fixed-length packets
have either stopped doing so altogether or,
as I do, use the format only for test.

The format is bad - it loses data.

That's not because of DCD, the age of the recorder or
the phase of the moon.
======================

BTW, how is the "format" nowadays, Mikey?

There have been other UDF programs, but most (all?) have been either
renamed versions of DCD or InCD; or have vanished due to lack of interest.

(Can you name one that's supposedly vanished?)

Have you heard of Sonic DLA? Sonic was selling it for $19, but then
raised it to $29 a couple of month later. That's some strange marketing
strategy for a product that's supposedly vanishing.

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------

(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

To be more accurate:

There is nothing wrong with packet writing itself, rather the problem has
been the poorly designed/implemented, and less than adequately tested,
implementations of ISO/IEC 13346.

Some of the problems are NOT necessarily the fault of the implementers.
ISO/IEC 13346 was published with numerous errors.
I've not yet seen an effort to correct the ISO/IEC standard, which would go
a long way towards helping the implementers.

--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
"Larry" wrote in message
ews.com...
In article , says...
In as much as the packet formatting used by such applications is
reliable,
then Direct CD is arguably the best. Problem is that such applications
are
not the best way of putting data on discs.



I would re-word that to read:

Of all available resources, packet writing in any of its implementations,
is
the worst possible way to store any information you wish to be able to use
in
the future.

Keep in mind at all times that CDrs and CDRws (I dont use the re-writables
anymore myself) are NOT BIG FLOPPIES and shouldn't be used with software
that
treats them as if they were.

The very best packet writing software is simply the best of a bad lot, and
should be avoided.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)


Howard Kaikow (w/ Leaky Assholes) splattered:

To be more accurate:

There is nothing wrong with packet writing itself, rather the problem has
been the poorly designed/implemented, and less than adequately tested,
implementations of ISO/IEC 13346.

Some of the problems are NOT necessarily the fault of the implementers.
ISO/IEC 13346 was published with numerous errors.
I've not yet seen an effort to correct the ISO/IEC standard, which would go
a long way towards helping the implementers.

The "numerous errors" must have crept in between (9/1/99) and (4/27/01).

On (9/1/99), the "format" was good enough for a backup softwa

=======================
From: Mike Richter (Acraptec ****)
Subject: A note on Take Two
Date: 9/1/99

For Take Two to work IDEALLY, your drive must support
packet writing and you must have DCD installed...to do it.
=====================

But then on (4/27/01), the "format" became fragile and faulty:

======================
From: Mike Richter (Roxio ****)
Subject: UDF, Packet Writing, and Backups
Date: 4/27/01

The format is fragile; the fault is not in the software per se.

In fact, the overwhelming majority of the complaints about
any UDF software are about the format, but the format is seen
through the software which gets the blame ...
=====================

Did the "numerous errors" creep in between (9/1/99) and (4/27/01)?


When Howard Kaikow wrote this, wonder why he did not mention the
"numerous errors". Must have leaked out his leaky assholes.

--------------
Howard Kaikow:

Why the hell cant anyone produce reliable packet writing software
(and I dont mean the flaws in the format) but the software itself?

The problem is not the format, it is the inept implementation of
the standards.
--------------