If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
.. --------------------------------------
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. Mikey spewed conforming to the standard (w/ numerous errors) made DirectCD faultless. Guess two wrongs make a right. ====================== From: Mike Richter (Roxio ****) Subject: Keeping Old Data Disks Readable Date: 2/28/04 Fixed-length packets create the least reliable, most fragile format available for writing CDs. However, they can still be read if written to the standard (as DCD always has). ====================== |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
.. --------------------------------------
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. Wonder why you were ****ed off - when the faults lie with the format? ======================= From: Howard Kaikow (w/ Leaky Assholes) Subject: Roxio sold Date: 8/11/04 I am rather disgusted with the, to be polite, poor implementations of ISO 9660 and ISO/IEC 13346. ======================= |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Howard Kaikow wrote:
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 problem in fact lies with the error rate of CD media in general and the specific problems of erasable media. The impact comes in the TOC, which despite the best efforts of the implementers must at least in part be scrubbed - erased and rewritten - whenever a file is written or erased. Because of the limited number of erase cycles the medium will tolerate, fixed-length packets are implemented by holding the TOC in RAM. (Yes, matters would be better if it were held on the hard drive instead, but the advantage would not be as great as one might hope.) Since it is in RAM, it's subject to scrambling with a power transient or OS crash. The same limitation on erasures means that the disc is fully fragmented by design - the sectors of even the first file written are scattered across the disc so that - except for that critical area of the TOC - no region will be scrubbed if a file is updated frequently. As a result, speed is dictated largely by seek and high-speed drives do not deliver the read/write as expected. All of that applies to fixed-length packets only. On a write-once disc with variable-length packets, there is some fragmentation (that's why Level 2 can't be used to close the session). That costs a bit in speed, but since there's no scrubbing and none of the spontaneous decay characteristic of high-speed erasable media. Mike -- http://www.mrichter.com/ |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I conclude from the lack of suggestions that there is no substitute for
DirectCD. I'm trying to write a bunch of jpeg files. In addition to DirectCD, I've also tried writing discs with Easy CD Creator. Unlike DirectCD, it claims to go to completion and to write readable discs (provided I use a write speed of 8x or less), but they are not in fact readable on any of the three computers in my house. I suppose it's possible that it's the CD burner (PlexWriter 16/10/40A) that's causing problems, not the software. There's no way to know. I go through a lot of discs and a lot of repeated tries with the software to get one readable disc. Funny thing, I did write one good disc with DirectCD on my first try (after a long time) yesterday, but I can't make another one. There's got to be an easier way! -- Curtis Croulet Temecula, California 33° 27' 59"N, 117° 05' 53"W |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
.. --------------------------------------
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 !! ) Curtis Croulet wrote (9/21/04): Is there any product that performs a function similar to DirectCD but which is reliable? I conclude from the lack of suggestions that there is no substitute for DirectCD. Unbelievable!! ========================== From: Curtis Croulet Date: 11/8/03 what do you suggest in place of DirectCD? ========================== |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
I agree that I have been hard on 'big floppy' packet formatting, but this is
largely coloured by experiences with InCD which frankly is a waste of hard disc space. Direct CD I have had fewer problems with, other than compatibility issues with hardware and operating systems. When it runs, it does exactly what it says on the tin. If I had to employ such an application then DCD would be the program of choice. With such poor standardisation and having to jump through hoops to produce a stable working environment, you have to wonder 'why bother', when there are easier methods of putting data on discs? I no longer use CDRW discs for any purpose other than testing or for displaying photographic images on TV via a DVD player. Packet formatting using these applications has become an answer to a question I am not asking any more -- Graham Mayor Mike Richter wrote: 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 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
' -------------------------------------------
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: Mike Richter (Friggin ****) splattered: snip I agree that I have been hard on 'big floppy' packet formatting, but this is largely coloured by experiences with InCD which frankly is a waste of hard disc space. Direct CD I have had fewer problems with, other than compatibility issues with hardware and operating systems. When it runs, it does exactly what it says on the tin. If I had to employ such an application then DCD would be the program of choice. With such poor standardisation and having to jump through hoops to produce a stable working environment, you have to wonder 'why bother', when there are easier methods of putting data on discs? I no longer use CDRW discs for any purpose other than testing ... Packet formatting using these applications has become an answer to a question I am not asking any more (Have you heard of DLA, InstantWrite, WriteCD?) When Mikey was shilling for Take Two, supposedly a backup software, as the second coming, Mikey spewed that it MUST use supposedly fragile, unreliable, flaky packet writing format, and that's for it to work IDEALLY !! ======================= 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. ======================= Moreover, the supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, faulty, unreliable packet writing format was good enough for BACKUP -- even when combined with the supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, forgetful, unreliable CD-RW media !! ===================== From: Mike Richter (Roxio ****) Subject: A note on Take Two Date: 9/1/99 You may back up ...to a DCD-formatted erasable. ===================== ----------------------------------- Does MS stand for "Mikey S-licker"? ----------------------------------- -------------------------------------- Does the "P" in MVP stand for "PRICK"? -------------------------------------- |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
-------------------------------------------
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: Mike Richter (Friggin ****) splattered: When Mikey was shilling for Take Two, supposedly a backup software, as the second coming, Mikey spewed that it MUST use supposedly fragile, unreliable, flaky packet writing format, and that's for it to work IDEALLY !! ======================= 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. ======================= Moreover, the supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, faulty, unreliable packet writing format was good enough for BACKUP -- even when combined with the supposedly *inherently* flaky, fragile, forgetful, unreliable CD-RW media !! ===================== From: Mike Richter (Roxio ****) Subject: A note on Take Two Date: 9/1/99 You may back up ...to a DCD-formatted erasable. ===================== But then when the reports of DirectCD bugs started pouring in, the SAME combination of packet writing format and cd-rw media -- that was good enough for backup -- became LETHAL for archiving: ======================== From: Mike Richter Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug? Date: 10/15/01 Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of erasables ... to forget is LETHAL for archiving. ========================= And this: ===================== From: Mike Richter (Friggin ****) Subject: Is UDF worth it?? Date: 7/23/02 I would definitely *not* recommend fixed-length packets for backup. It is the least reliable and most fragile format available, regardless of the software you choose to write it. ===================== --------------------------- Wow! What a Friggin' ****! --------------------------- -------------------------------------- Mike Richter, were you born with "Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face? -------------------------------------- (Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?) |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Richter wrote:
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. DLA is still around, having been taken up by Sonic. Whether it will survive their take over from Roxio remains to be seen. On the whole I have found it the least intrusive; it also handles CD-R for variable length; DVD; and Mount Rainier (under the name of Easy Write), which does at least reduce the problems of wearing out disks. Not that I find I use packet writing these days, at the price R disks now are; I use in ISO session mode and discard when no longer any content to be kept -- Alex Nichol Bournemouth, U.K. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, there media issues, but the problems are egg-saturated due to the
issues with the implementations. -- http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site. "Mike Richter" wrote in message ... Howard Kaikow wrote: 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 problem in fact lies with the error rate of CD media in general and the specific problems of erasable media. The impact comes in the TOC, which despite the best efforts of the implementers must at least in part be scrubbed - erased and rewritten - whenever a file is written or erased. Because of the limited number of erase cycles the medium will tolerate, fixed-length packets are implemented by holding the TOC in RAM. (Yes, matters would be better if it were held on the hard drive instead, but the advantage would not be as great as one might hope.) Since it is in RAM, it's subject to scrambling with a power transient or OS crash. The same limitation on erasures means that the disc is fully fragmented by design - the sectors of even the first file written are scattered across the disc so that - except for that critical area of the TOC - no region will be scrubbed if a file is updated frequently. As a result, speed is dictated largely by seek and high-speed drives do not deliver the read/write as expected. All of that applies to fixed-length packets only. On a write-once disc with variable-length packets, there is some fragmentation (that's why Level 2 can't be used to close the session). That costs a bit in speed, but since there's no scrubbing and none of the spontaneous decay characteristic of high-speed erasable media. Mike -- http://www.mrichter.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Recovery Software for DirectCD CDRs? | A Person | Cdr | 8 | February 21st 04 07:36 AM |
DirectCD Question | bb | Cdr | 9 | January 27th 04 01:01 AM |
Is DirectCD on XP possible? | BigJ | Cdr | 8 | October 13th 03 07:01 AM |
Is DirectCD on XP possible? | BigJ | Cdr | 1 | October 11th 03 10:50 AM |
DirectCD 5 & WinXP | Mochyn Brwnt :8( | Cdr | 4 | June 28th 03 07:50 AM |