A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Cdr
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

had it with DirectCD



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 22nd 04, 02:22 AM
smh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.. --------------------------------------
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  
Old September 22nd 04, 02:24 AM
smh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.. --------------------------------------
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  
Old September 22nd 04, 05:49 AM
Mike Richter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old September 22nd 04, 06:32 AM
Curtis Croulet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old September 22nd 04, 08:36 AM
smh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

.. --------------------------------------
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  
Old September 22nd 04, 08:41 AM
Graham Mayor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old September 22nd 04, 09:55 AM
smh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

' -------------------------------------------
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  
Old September 22nd 04, 10:14 AM
smh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-------------------------------------------
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  
Old September 22nd 04, 11:44 AM
Alex Nichol
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old September 22nd 04, 04:32 PM
Howard Kaikow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.