Slashdot Mirror
High Density CDs
goofrider writes "Sanyo introduced a new format called HD-Burn, supported by their new DVD+/-RW chip. It allows the drive to burn up 1.4GB of data using a regular 700MB blank CD-R blank. The resulting HD-Burned CD-R can only be read by supporting DVD/DVD-ROM drives and CD-ROM drives. Most DVD/DVD-ROM drives can support the format via a firmware upgrade. It's unclear how easy and how likely will it be for future drives to support this format. In contrast, Plextor released their new GigaRec technology in their new PlexWriter Premium (read a review here). GigaRec also records on regular blank CD-Rs, allows up to 1GB of data on a 700MB disc. however, the disc can be read on any modern good-quality CD-ROM drives with no firmware upgrades required. So now I can record 2x the data on a CD-R but I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters. :)"
Been there, done that. They're just buying time until DVD media takes over (which it is already beginning to).
So, history repeats itself again - higher density on older media.
When do we start punching holes in them and flipping them over?
www.eFax.com are spammers
You just have to create your own CD filesystem, and cope with the fact that it's incompatible with all other CDs in the world
That's okay. Here on Slashdot, you can't have subjects longer than 50 characters (as you can see above).
This will probably flop, unless it becomes an integrated standard in all DVD +/- RW drives. No one wants to buy a special cdrom drive just to read high-density CDs, especially when better (read: DVD) technology exists.
Maybe I have been doing this to long but this is reminiscent of turning 360k 5 1/4 inch floppies into 1.2 MB by adding a cutting a notch opposite of the write protect side. You can also do the same to 3 1/2 720k by adding a hole to the top making it a 1.44 mb.
Well, sortof, with their DD-CDR or whatever, using new tech to get 1.2 gig per disc.
If the two formats were compatible, it might almost be useful. Of course that's doubtful. So I cant really see the usefulness of this.
I thought maybe for archiving or something, but then the cost of the Sony drive is comparable to a DVD-R, so why would I want 1.2 gigs instead of 4.5?
These little fart in a jar techs will no doubt go the way of the zip drive. A day late and a dollar short - unless the industry works together for a standard thats cross compatible, and makes it ubiquitous.
Fuck it, I'll just burn two cds.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
I believe that the comments arn't enabled until the story hits the front page for everyone, so there's no comments because subscribers can't make any.
yeah if you keep burning it joliet you don't - feel free to burn in a different format and you can have the longer names.
cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
Can you put music in CD format on these? I mean it said it can only be read by DVD-ROM or CDROM, but even if that is the case could you make a music CD out of it? What's preventing it from playing in your car stereo? I could understand the first one not playing because of how much compression there is, but the second one that is only putting 1 GB on the disk isn't quite as bad.
CMIIW, but he subscribers have to wait to post just like everyone else. How about an option to turn of the "Story Coming" advertisement for some of us freeloaders who don't care to see the future?
You should use AdiumX on your Mac.
we stop worrying about sticking more data on CDRs and DVDs and start creating INEXPENSIVE (free) software for DVD authoring?
When I say "DVD Authoring" I mean a FULL feautured suite including menu creation and beautiful buttons, etc.
Joe Blow (and for DVD burning this includes me) wants to buy a DVD burner, take it home, and put his movies onto a DVD with a purty menu. He doesn't want to pay $330 for a nice DVD+-R/RW drive, take it home, and find out that the ULead Demo software does NOT work. He then does not want to shell out $200 - $1500 for DVD authoring software.
If DVD burning is to catch on software has to be created that is free and that works well.
DVD-RWs are cheap enough (and going to continue to drop) that we WON'T need to find new ways to store more info on 700mb CDs.
You know how many problems people have with overburning crap? Come on, that was with an extra 12 megs on a 700 MB CD. This is an extra 700 MB on a 700 MB CD. Get real. It will be too prone to corruption to be of any real value.
I think that this would be an exceptional alternative to using 2 CD game sets, or switching to DVDs.
Sounds fishy to me. "To read these new DVDs you must upgrade the firmware on your DVD. Oh, by the way, the region coding firmware will be installed too. Happy reflashing!"
Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
I'm a little unclear as to who the target audience for this is. I can't remember any time I've sat down and thought "Damn, if only I had 300 more megabytes of space I could cram all my pr0n into ten cds instead of fifteen". Add in the firmware bit and you're targeting a non-existent audience.
The Plextor GigaRec sounds similar to the tweek that Sega did to the DreamCast CD-ROM drives to read GD-ROM disks. I was wondering how long it would take for such a tweek to become mainstream.
So now I can record 2x the data on a CD-R but I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters. :)
:-)
Why not? Don't you have a Macintosh?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
The trouble is that since it's not a ubiquitous standard, it's not really all that useful. Compare to old optical media standards - there were plenty of optical medias that you could record to (and even re-record) long before CDR came out. But CDR took off like all crazy because it was standard media you could play back anywhere.
It allows the drive to burn up 1.4GB of data using a regular 700MB blank CD-R blank.
I rewrote my drivers some time ago to provide exactly this level of performance, through the simple but clever technique of only writing 1's to the CD and skipping all the 0's, which the CD drive never reads anyhow.
Well, okay, I rewrote the "write" portion of the code. The "read" portion is still giving me trouble, but I'm confident it's just a matter of time.
but I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters. :)
Use different software. DiscJuggler on W32 for example will allow you to override the normal file system limits to your desire. The resulting disc may not be compatible will all OS's but it will allow you to do it. Another solution is to pack up the files into an archive (gz, bz, zip, rar etc..) and just burn the packed file. Although the files are not directly accessible from the cd, it will maintain the names once extracted. The ability to maintain the filenames is sometimes more important then convenience.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
ThisIsA64CharacterFilenameBoyIsItLongImSureDespera teToUse65.txt
Yea, i'm worried :)
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Our top scientists are working overtime to outpace the expansion of bloatware. This bold advance should help defer the need to ship everything on multiple CDs for at least another six months! :)
With the steady decline in DVD-R prices, expect this to be a novelty, especially the version that needs a firmware upgrade for the drives. We'll be buying bulk packs of DVD-R's for $12 bucks very soon.
What's the read / write speed? I confess I didn't RTFA.
but I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters...
f teenandthirteenseconds.tar.gz'r tyfirsttwothousandthreeelevenfif teenandfourteenseconds.tar.gz'
Yes its such a bitch to pay 20 cents for a CD-R and not be able to name your backups 'thursdayaprilthirtyfirsttwothousandthreeelevenfi
'thursdayaprilthi
Get paid to code OSS
So now I can record 2x the data on a CD-R but I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters. :)
YOU don't like it, YOU fix it!
Why else would you subscribe? I mean the whole point would be to beat everyone else to the Fist Post right?
Eat at Joe's.
64 characters eh? Back in my day we only had eight. And we didn't have any of your fancy pants lower case letters to fool around with either....Bah!
A blank CD-R blank eh? I'm so confused.
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." -- RFC 1925
"old technology" that was used by the GD-ROM drives that SEGA put into their Dreamcast system? As nice as it is to see double data capacity on a cheap medium, it is quickly becoming more affordable to jump into DVD+R/RW or DVD-R/RW format which holds 3 times that of a DD CDROM for only twice the cost of a blank CDR.
To cram more data on a CD with Linux :
- If you don't mind doing a little work to access the data, store a big tarball on the CD
- If you want immediate access to the data, overlay a compressed filesystem on top of the ISO9660 (less simple to setup and works only on your system)
--It allows the drive to burn up 1.4GB of data using a regular 700MB blank CD-R blank. The resulting HD-Burned CD-R can only be read by supporting DVD/DVD-ROM drives and CD-ROM drives.--
This sounds too propietary. I wonder if CD's burned in this drive can be used reliably on other machines? I think a wait and see would be best with this.
Another hack that is too little too late. I already have my DVD burner, and it already burns 4.7 GB discs.
No thanks!
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
But with 5,25" floppies. A standard 360KB floppy could be reformatted to contain a staggering 800KB. To read them back you needed to load a 5KB driver called fm80.
Ofcourse, this practice became obsolete with the introduction of the 3,5" 1,4 MB disks.
Two years ago I would've told anyone who was getting a burner that it was extremely difficult to require more than 1 CD to back up all of a person's data (not apps, just the documents and other data created by them), especially on a Windows box that begs for a clean re-install every 6-12 months. However, nowadays with people having multi-gig MP3 collections being commonplace, it seems 640KB is in fact NOT enough for everyone.
Overrated Moderation: This posts sucks... because.
How many people had huge stacks of 720K 3.5" disks well after HD floppies drives came out? How many people weren't willing or able to spend 3 times the money on those new HD disks? I can say that I had many old floppies that suddenly became more useful once I learned all you had to do was drill a hole in the top lefthand corner to turn them into HD floppies. Sure...some crapped out. They weren't meant to be used as HD disks. But I actually still have some of those old disks, which are about 10-15 years old now, and they still work.
Now that I can have the same kind of capacity increase for CDRs, without modifying the media, I say that's progress, and will only help in transitioning to better technology once the prices come down. People will always need high storage capacities.
Yet another proprietary method of storing more information than was originally intended on a media (format? type?) that continues its inexorable descent into obsolesence.
Start pushing that Blu-ray DVD technology, people. At 4.7Gb, even standard DVDs are starting to look at little bit tired; with any luck, Blu-ray will become affordable around the time DVDs really start to seem limited, where storage capacity is concerned.
Floptical disks were floppies that used an optical tracking mechanism to align the magnetic head with the floppy tracks to achieve increased track density.
A trick which, of course, wouldn't help with optical media to begin with, although didn't Bernoulli drives use magnetism to increase the CDROM track density?).So we can store more data on old media blah blah blah.... I want my blue laser burner and media, I can store some real amounts of data then!
-illumina+us "I put on my robe and wizard hat..."
I remember systems such as the Dreamcast had their discs designed to hold more than 700MB specifically so people pirating them couldn't do a perfect job, requiring audio tracks and cutscenes to be surgically removed from the game to fit on a normal CD. I know some PS2 games are just out of reach for CD pirates due to their > 700MB size as well. It seems to me it's quite possible for a soldering iron based firmware upgrade to put those games within reach for pirates now.
:).
Pirates are always the early adopters of these kind of technologies
Overrated Moderation: This posts sucks... because.
Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
Now, punching the high-density hole on a DD floppy- that was risky. Sometimes the manufacturer's DD media was good enough to hold HD tracks, but often not. Usually you found out a few months down the line when your "HD on the cheap" floppies started having data errors.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Eventhough a novelty, it did allow me to personalize CDRs like business cards.
The new Plextor mentioned in the article sounds interesting. I wonder if I can access that feature on a Mac?
I know there's this program for OS X to overburn Firestarter - I use it often.
Hopefully, Roxio will make it availible in the next version of Toast.
As a note, firmware on optical drives, especially DVDs is risky due to region coding. If the firmware goes slightly wrong your region could get messed up. I know on the Mac you just reset open firmware and that usually takes care of that.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
My favorites collection is something that I backup along with my normal data. It's quite easy to go > 64 characters with the ways some web pages title themselves. The easy solution of course is to just zip 'em up in a file, or export to bookmark.htm, but it's still one more step that I have to do becuase of some arbitrary 64 character filename limit.
I would like to see the 3.5 in size CD/DVD to be more popular. They just seem to be easier to carry in your pocket, etc.
So, I found out that my neighbor walked in on my roommate masturbating while watching Animal Planet. Yeah, surprising! Well this tension has been building up and has left me uneasy. The big problem is that he was doing it in a common area we share and now I'm uncomfortable laying anywhere in the room. What am I supposed to do? I know he'll deny it!
Read Abby's answer
It seems as though a new data recording standard comes out every week. Until all major computer and hardware manufacturers agree on a single new standard, all of these new data recording technologies are just going to be niche products like the Iomega zip drive.
If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
First the sword, then the musket, then the boat. Now this. Looks like 1/4.
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
CD Mate, it allows Romeo mode- 128 characters.
www.cd-mate.com
Sanyo's technology shouldn't stand a chance in surviving, much like Iomega's 250MB disks/drives. I would bet that most people (excluding techno-elitist) who are still using Zip drives regardless of their drive capacity, use only 100MB disks, since sharing them utilizes the much wider installed base of 100MB drives. Since CDR and CDRW has replace much of Iomega's usefulness, 250MB drives are pretty useless, especially in a cost/size comparison.
Likewise, why would anyone bother to use a technology with a very limited install base to double the capacity of a CD when DVD's are getting cheaper, hold even more data, and the installed base is much more prevalent.
However, plextor's solution should be more ideal despite the smaller 'overburn' rate. Since people can use it right away on the existing install base without worrying too much about compatibility when they go to share their media.
I wrote a patch to this filesystem which implements lzip compression at the block layer... much better capacity and throughput!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Everyone is going on about interoperability. Of course it's not compatible, these companies are just "making stuff up."
But there is a use - what about backups and other offline storage that are generally not shared, or shared only with coworkers? This could save lots of money on media among such users.
Don't knock it! As long as it doesn't cause rampant data corruption, that is..
Justin
"Why would God give us a waist if we wasn't supposed to rest our pants on it?" - Rev. Roy McDaniels
Come on, what are you going to use more than 64 characters for? Descriptive names for your pr0n collection? "hot threesome fuck action MFF the babes are pretty hot in this one oh momma.jpg"???
punching the high-density hole on a DD floppy- that was risky.
Yeah, I remember that one - but (for those of us in Amiga-land) you could use the HD floppies in the Amiga's DD drive.. contrary to what salesmen at various computer stores would tell us (I remember one guy trying to convince me that the "tracks are different" - so I asked him to show me.. and he said "oh, they're too small to see without a microscope"..)
*sigh*
Then there was the time someone convinced a "friend" that his new 1581 drive (Commodore's 3.5" floppy for the c64/128) would work just like his 1541 (ie. he could drill a hole in the disks, and turn them over to get twice the storage..)
I had a good laugh when he brought it to me when he couldn't get the disk out afterwards.
No matter how big the discs get, the pros have one-up on consumers right now, since writing in ISO data mode wastes a great deal of space for no particular reason.
VCDs can use up the full capacity of a disc, why isn't everyone trying to make software that allows consumers to write DivX videos, or even OGG/MP3 audio, utilizing the full capacity of these discs?
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Does anyone know why all the DVD drives on the market are limited to 4.7GB? I thought DVDs could handle far more than that.
of course and the reason why is that doing otherwise would reveal almost nobody subscribes to this lame ass blog
I've been using the XCD format for several months now. I write my video files (usually TV episodes that I can't otherwise videotape) in Linux and can read them in both Linux and Win2k.
"XCD - 800 megs on a regular CD-R with any writer"
XCD basically allows you to use the Mode 2 (used by VCD), which allows you around 800MB on a "700MB" CD-R disc at the expense of physical error correction, but unlike other Mode 2 formats, you can write any movie format. VCD is limited to mpegs of a specific bitrate. I burn both SVCD files and Ogg files to XCD.
Setting it up was initially confusing (it wasn't complicated, but I simply couldn't find very good documentation), but now I only have to run 'mode2cdmaker -s -m sometvepisode.mpg', and I have a bin/cue/toc fileset that standard CD burning software can recognize (well, at least, K3b -- a Nero-like graphical burner for Linux/KDE -- can). The only problem I have with mode2cdmaker is that I can only use the -s parameter when creating an image with only a single movie file, but if I don't use the -s parameter, then the image has an empty-ish first track (three episodes of Futurama, for instance, would find themselves on tracks 2, 3 and 4). But that's a minor foible.
This is awesome. I am now addicted to downloading 750-805MB movies (not films -- I pay at the movies every week despite my disgust with the abundance of commercials before the films -- I mean, why am I paying twice as much as before if I'm no longer getting the benefit of watching the movie without commercials, which was one of the main benefits theatres had over television!) in svcd format and burning them to disk. I'm starting to run out of physical space in my room! *_*
Some relevant links:
http://xcd.sourceforge.net/
"XCD: The next home entertainment storage format"
http://www.divxland.org/eng/mode2cd.htm
Mode 2 CD Guide
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/2881.cfm
http://www.afterdawn.com/glossary/terms/xcd.cfm
"Basically you can fit more data on single CD than using regular Mode 1, because Mode 2 doesn't use triple error correction like Mode 1 does."
well exactly when would it be ontopic? jerks.
It sounds good and all, but will it increase the audio capabilities of my cd player? maybe more than 80min (i haven't found a reliable source of 90 and 99min cds yet). Or will it work in my mp3 cdplayer, so that i can have 20 albums on a disc instead of 10. Maybe now i can fit a whole live Ozzfest Tour stop on a single disc, in decent quality.
Back in the early 1990s I was an Amiga CDTV/CD32 multimedia developer and Nimbus, the CD replication company, told us they had developed a system for mastering far >700Mb on a CD. The trick was simple - make the spiral tracking groove tighter and you can fit more data on. The specifications for CD were written in the 70s, and the technology has improved so much that CD pickups can focus with far more accurate control than is necessary for the standards, allowing them to cram more onto a disk.
Nimbus' system had a limit of 99 minutes of music on a disc - purely because they didn't want to break two-digit LCD displays in CD Players!
However their project was killed off by Sony/Phillips (either or both, I can't remember) who told them quite bluntly they weren't allowed to master CDs that didn't follow the Red Book rules for the CD standard exactly, and that meant a max of just over 80 mins of audio.
The difference nowdays is that you can record such disks on your own burner, in those days this could only be done when making the glass master.
Jolyon
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
Because the extra data is there for a reason. Regular data is burned in "Mode 1", which takes 2048 bytes of data per sector. It then pads this out to 2352 bytes (or something close to that; I forget) with error-correcting information.
VCDs are burned in "Mode 2", which uses all 2352 bytes per sector. If there's some kind of chip or scratch, you're SOL. With VCDs, which use MPEG-1, this isn't a problem. But if you're putting programs or even DivX movies on a CD, believe me, you want that error-correcting information.
Here's an article that's not up, but the Google cache is still working.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
650mb CDs have been around "forever", I honestly can't remember when I bought my 1x CD reader. The upgrade to 700mb was incremental, but didn't really require anything, I suppose the 1gb disc could have such a future.
But the 1,4gb disc is pointless, with 4,7gb DVD writers becoming affordable and Blue-Ray 23gb(?) rewritables on the horizon. Not to mention the DVD format has an established userbase of DVD readers out there for movies, making a full-blown DVD writer far more interesting than a super-cd.
Personally, I was hoping to get the NEC ND-1300 for DVD±R(W), whatever format comes out on top, but it looks like it's delayed and I don't see much 4x discs out anyway. But I suppose sometime this summer I'll have a DVD burner.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Are there technical reasons to use ISO9660? Does it have some special error correction, or could I just burn ext2 or something?
this isn't to compete with dvd-r's. this is a new feature added to cdwriter drives, which happen to still be selling on the market if you didn't notice. if you're going to buy a cdrw drive, and that's still done now, since you can get one for $35 when the cheapest dvd-r writer is $170, you look at the 2 drives and think, should i get the one that writes cdr's for $35 or should i get the one that can write regular cdr's or double length cdr's using the same disks for $40. I can make regular cd's with it if i want, or double length ones. That's what they're going for.
Does anybody know how this works? It seems to me that you couldn't just make the tracks closer together and still expect to have compatability with other readers just with a firmware upgrade - since its doubtful that all the other drives would have stepper motors capable of handling the reduced spacing. I remember hearing once that CD's contained a huge amount of redundancy (I heard that they were 3x redundant). Does this simply reduce the amount of redundany, and if so, does this have any implications on reliability?
Interestingly enough apparently Apex dvd players have HDCD compatibility out of the box. Does anyone know if this is the same as either of these competing "formats"? If it was I could see it as a great improvement. 1400Megs on a SVCD would mean that a dvd quality movie with ac3 audio and great quality would be able to fit on two of these CD's.
Coo, thats a lot of porn.
I'm smarter than the average bear.
Sounds like it'll work, but make a more disk...
--
T
I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered. - George Best
Isn't this similar to Sony's DDCD format (that also never left the ground) ? Okay so now they're using a DVD-Rom laser to do it, but it's the end result is the same.
This is another almost-good idea that's just five years too late. And I don't plan on waiting for Pioneer to release a firmware upgrade for my drive, it's already hard enough getting support as it is.
What I really want is high-speed DVD-9 burning. Yes, 9.4gb with at least 4x speed, preferably 8x. Now get rid of these inbred 1x DVD-R media manufacturers who haven't realized nobody has 1x burners anymore, and let's get cracking!
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I recommend to stop constructing use cases for something that is sooo blatant superfluous and over the edge like this. Ok, 100 nerd points out of 100 for technical coolness, but interoperability is key! IMO this is something to brag about on a lunch break, but not something to rely on in a typical business scenario, especially not for backup purposes or share data with the co(w)-worker next door. Btw. most information is shared over the network these days, isn't it?
With DVD+/-/R/RW already taking market share and media prices falling, this is just the swan song of an outdated technology.
I never heard of anyone flipping over 5081s, itwould have just read them backwards or upside down, it wasn't like the columns would punch between the other columns.
Now for a while, I worked on a Univac SS-90 which used Univac's (probably patented) 90 column cards, which were really 45 column cards but using the top 6 rows for the first 45 columns and the bottom 6 rows for the last 45 columns. You got 90 columns of text, but still only 45 columns of binary. What was neat was that the 90 column cards used round holes, not only could you use a regular hand punch if you were super careful, but we used to raid the trash cans at the computer center, running all the discard 5081s thru our card reader, and if it couldn't detect any of the rectangular holes, then it was blank to our card reader.
I had never thought of it, but there was probably some optimal combination of round 90 column punches and rectangular 80 column punches which would give you more than 960 bits. But certainly not double, and not even 80+90.
Infuriate left and right
Couldn't you use the "1 only" write technology
to further compress the 32 4-byte number(32 bits)?
It would then only take 5 bits.
You could then just memorize the number and you wouldn't need a CD at all.
Don't all the HD and BlueLaser formats about to come to market make all this kind of a moot point. CDRom's are nice because everyone has a CD Player. DVD's aren't there yet because of all the different standards (My home DVD Player chokes on most burned DVD's). We already see this new formats coming to market, and they actually have enough space to be usefull. What would be nice would be to get a blueray drive of some sort for $300, that will also burn CD's and DVD's. Then you can use one disc for backup, one disc for CD's, and another for DVD's. You sacrafice no combatability. Of course that's a few years away. Until then, I'll stick to my CD-R.
Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
One has to think. If this technology can be applied to regular CDRS.. why couldn't it be applied to DVDS..
I mean, what good is one gig of data if a tiny scrach kills the surface?
I'm assuming that these work by getting rid of a lot of the error correction stuff.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
...and put it with my LS-120, zip drives, and tape drive backups. Can you say stooooopid?
For 3 ½" diskettes under DOS and Windows, I used to use the excellent freeware fdformat utility & fdread driver (by Cristophe Höchstetter from Germany IIRC) that I got from a BBS. It had a somewhat cryptic command line interface and multitude of settings. Someone in the northeastern US whose name I've forgotten (sorry) wrote a very nice graphical front end for it (also freeware) that made it a breeze to use. IIIRC, fdformat readjusted some of the low-level parameters (sect/track, etc.) and got rid of the duplicate fat. My favorite setting got 1.72 Meg on a 1.44 (this was in the days when 3 1/2" floppies still cost enough to make one want to go through hoops for an extra few hundred kilobytes). Instead of running the DOS format, you ran the fdformat (it was faster than the DOS format as well). For critical back-ups, I would use the standard 1.44 format just in case, but several people that I know and I made hundreds of floppies with fdformat and never lost as much as a byte. Unfortunately, the program/driver never made the jump to Win32.
Sigs are bad for your health.
This reminds me at the 720KB floppy disks with only one hole. I used to drill another hole on the other side so I can write 1.4MB to them.
The only difference is that I was getting the full HD capacity by drilling the hole. With this you get less then half the capacity of a DVD-R disk.
This is will be great for backups...
DO NOT USE THIS FOR BACKUPS. Technical details on the format are missing but the only place I can think of for them to stick this extra data is in the space normally reserved for the extensive error-correction codes used on normal CD-ROMS.
All CD-ROMS have far more 'data' on them then you can get off with a CD ripper. CDs have a lot of error correcting codes on them because they are exposed to the real world (unlike a hard drive platter) and need to recover reasonably gracefully from large scratches and such.
The last thing you want for your backups is to push the medium past its rated capacity, in this case dropping the error correcting codes! If you cared enough to back it up in the first place, you don't want to lose this extra protection. Without it, the smallest scratch might wipe out huge chunks of data in nearly-impossible to reconstruct ways.
It is possible that they are getting some benefit by burning the bits closer together on the medium, but again, the last thing you want with a backup is to push a medium beyond its rated capacity. In months or ever weeks the bits might start bleeding together because the medium was never rated for that density.
God help your backups if they're doing this with a little bit of both.
Good to try to burn a little longer movie onto, where capacity is a higher priority then reliability. Horrible, horrible idea for backups.
64 characters is only a limitation of Microsoft Joliet. RockRidge, used by Unix systems, supports up to 255 characters, and plain iso 9660 only supports 31 (and that includes the useless ;1 version number.)
1) Klaus Knopper. If he can put 2 Gigs of software into a 700MB iso, I'd like him to have the (compatible as advertised?) 1000MB version to play with, too.
;)
2) Jorg Schilling, whose cdrtools is the easiest (well, my favorite) way to burn ISOs under Linux, for obvious reasons
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
to my surprise, i found out (too late, argh) that the news artivle mentioned [http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-997817.html] goes into grater detail than the comapany's site itself and nicely explains how the physical density was increased.
but what do i know, i'm just a model.
Shouldn't they be mis-advertising this as 1.44GB? The 1.44MB floppies are really only 1.41MB.
...who type the entire body of an email or post in the subject line, or at least start the sentence in the subject, and continue it in the body.
I detest overly long file names. IMHO, spaces shouldn't be a valid character in file names either.
See attached : "Why I hate fricking long filenames attached Word document for slashdot post May 1st 2003.doc"
64 characters ought to be enough for anybody.
8+3 ought to be enough for anyone!
---
"Women want a lot of things from one man. Conversely, men want one thing from a lot of women."
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
the cartoon on the right side bar.
"Then, you are star now for DVD players"
-- Senior Software Engineer, Attorney appearance services, locallawyerapp.com.
The piece says that Sanyo can offer 40% more on the disc by giving you 1.4GB while Plextor offer a different system which can offer you 40% more on the disc by giving you 1.2 GB!
Huh?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Google for XCD. As someone else said though, you won't have any error correction so be careful.
You can have both with ordinary CD readers/writers. Just compress (zip, gzip, tar -cvzf) the files. Typical lossless compression ratios (for text) is about 2:1 so the CD holds 1.4 GB and you get long filesnames when you uncompress. True there is a performance trade off, but as processors get faster, the compression/decompression penality become less burdensome. However, jpeg, mp3, and encrypted data can't be any further compressed, and if you used the new firmware I guess you could get 2 gb on that same 50 cent disk.
Christoph H. Hochstätter. I wrote it from my memory (which has no ECC).
Sigs are bad for your health.
pip a:=b:*.com;*
The only drawback are a rather prolonged burn time (all night), which is in itself related to the expotential increase in frustration/dispair when media gets corrupted.
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
...That HATES DVD menus? I mean seriously... You put the movie in and you have to sit through god only knows how much crap before you're finally presented with a menu. Then once you've reached this point, you have to select whatever god-awful icon they have chosen to represent "Start Movie".
I'm sorry if I have offended any DVD purists, but I've been specifically ripping DVDs I own to divx just so I don't have to sit through any crap to get a movie to play.
What about that poor undergroundlighteningrod dude?
People in marketing know that there's a relationship between price and demand/sales.
Lower the price and your per-unit profit drops, but you'll sell more units. But the relationship isn't linear so the total profit on all units sold varies.
At some price, the total profit is maximized - lower the price and sales won't increase enough to offset the lower per-unit profit. Raise the price and sales drop too fast for the higher per-unit profit to compensate.
That price point is different in different markets (different parts of the world), beacause of things like differences in disposable income.
I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters. :)
Sure you can, just use Romeo format for long filenames instead of Joliet. Adaptec EZ-CD 95 supported this format, but doesn't run on anything newer than Windows 95. NTI CD-Maker supports the Romeo format, and if it doesn't support your CD-R drive, you can always make an ISO with NTI CD-Maker and burn it with your preferred utility (I used to do this with my old CD-R drive). The Romeo format supports filenames of up to 255 characters, and is readable on Win95 & up and Linux, but supposedly isn't readable on DOS. Romeo format discs work with my MP3 CD player, and I've had no problems with them at all. I even made some Romeo format DVD-Rs, and these worked great, even though they probably violate all sorts of specs.
if you are using joliet for your cdrom then you are using a 128 character filename. every character you see in the filename is made from a 2 byte value (the other byte is usually a null value, and a complete waste for u.s. english) because of m$'s "unicode". from the coincidental number of bytes allowed in the filename i'll guess that the lesser-known "romeo" file system was joliet without unicode. the only difference is that support for the romeo filesystem has been pulled by the mainstream software for the mainstream os's :(
i don't want to come across as being language-centric? but i do believe that unicode is horrible waste of space. everything, used or not, is not expressed as a two byte value. filenames, formatted text from various m$ editors, all the text in any recent win32 exe (wonder why the filesizes continue to increase? all the strings are stored twice the size)
if you want people to think you know what you are talking about, just put ".com" at the end of everything you say.com
jeez, where to start?
"Also your PC needs more than just CPU/Mobo/RAM (which is all your $300 number could really include)"
xp2000+, $50
512M pc2700, $50
mobo, $50... and that has firewire, usb2.0, 5.1 sound, LAN
That = 150, not 300... add a case with power supply for $75, a $75 17" monitor, keyboard and mouse and you are at $325 for a computer.
"(Personally i paid $400 for my pcs video card alone, and over $200 on its soundcard,"
I can guarantee your $400 video card is ludicrously more than you'll need for the next two years of games... and if you aren't a gamer, then the only person who needs something like that is a graphic designer and they will spend more than that (a $2000 mac comes with 9700pro, but it's only a single proc 1GHz [yes, I know that GHz aren't everything] with no dvdburner). Get a $180 video card that is much more cost effective. As for sound, go for an Audigy 2 for $100.
Add OEM Windows for $100 and a coolass ethernet card (because 40Mbit/s is terribly inadequate for surfing the web or running full programs from a server such as I'm doing right now on my PC) for maybe $50 and you are only at $750 or $800.
That $2000 Mac without a dvd burner is TWICE the price of the PC and it cannot possibly be twice as fast. That $2k Mac also doesn't have a monitor... so add another $75.
Let's see, what else... oh, yeah, you can't just upgrade as you go if you want to piecemeal your computer. Say I don't have much money and want to upgrade from an old computer to a new and fast one over the course of 3 months (which I did), you can't do that with a Mac.
Try buying another floppy for a Mac, a second sound card, etc. Buying new components is a lot more expensive and not always available for a Mac.
Left and right channels on the CD like they do for audio-books? You'd get instantly double the space, and it would work in every player on the planet, because they can all read audio CD--right?
You can get any length of names, and even compression, by selecting anothe filesystem than ios9660for your CD. Of course, you won't be able to read it in windows that way, but who cares? You can use ext2 or cramfs or whatever, and if it's only as backup-media, you can even pipe tar -cvjf directly to cdrecord (you will need some magicv script if you are going to make multi-volume tarballs that way) :)
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
And that number, of course, would be 42.
Now, first things first (but not necessarily in that order). Unicode is not a standard from Microsoft, and using the two bytes 'm' and '$' does not make you cooler, nor does it make me cooler to nag about (darn).
Claiming that a filesystem should use 8-bit values for all their files is like going back to the times when there was no internet for the common computer user, when each computer used only one character set all of the time. Today, I come across both US-ASCII, ISO-8859-1, 8, 16 and 32-bit Unicode and the good old codepage 850 daily. What would happen if an OS had support only for one of these character sets? Believe it or not, most computer users are not natively English speaking, and most users get in touch with many different funny looking characters or languages each day. At least so I presume.
Regarding the choice of encoding, I suppose 16-bit Unicode maybe isn't the best choice for storage. UTF-8 would seem appropriate to me, but then, there might be some issues with Thai filenames, reducing the numbers of allowed chars to 32 or so, for Thai filenames, while 128 for the American. That might be considered unfair.
All in all, we need a common character set. Unicode is the solution (although some characters codes don't have the most optimal order) and it's here to stay. At least I think it's funny to have Thai filenames on the Thai MP3's I've got, and the Icelandic names for the Icelandic.
And I knew I should have sumbitted each format as a separate story so readers don't get confused. :) Their are 2 technologies here, Sanyo's HD-Burn and Plextor's GigaRec.
For one, they both use regular blank CD-Rs. Blank DVD-R/+R are $2-4 a pop even in lots of 500-100. It's nice to be able to squeeze more data on the same old CD-Rs even at the cost of compatibility. It's the same situation with 800/800MB blank CD-Rs: higher capacity, reduced compatiblity.
GigaRec can be read by any regular good quality CD drive (supposedly). It's HD-Burn that needs a support DVD drive (and that's DVD drive not a CD drive). On the bright side of HD-Burn, Sanyo is an OEM for mechanisms and chipsets, and they'll be likely to make all their future drives HD-Burn compatible. many drives on the market today use Sanyo inside, so they really have the market share to push a new format.
GigaRec is unlikely to be licensed to other OEMs. Plextor doesn't have a habit of licensing their technologies. So GigaRec will solely be a value-added feature to Plextor drives.
Sony and Philips did that some time ago (2001) with what they called DDCD (double-density revisited...)
So what's the news?
my
As the other reply pointed out, it's possible but not advisable to use other filesystems, as long the OS supports it.
AFAIK, the extensions use a special file which stores the ISO9660 filenames along with the longer ones. It's not unlike the long and short filenames in DOS/Windows.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
you can just write your cds in UDF as that's filesystem for future optical media at the moment, especially rewriteable media like Blue-Ray. it's supported just fine on windows and linux... you can write up to 254 characters when not using Unicode encodings.
hell you can even write to it like a floppy without using multiple sessions if you've got the right tools (directCD)
The cd hold 1.4 g double the size of 700 meg .
It is 17 cents per disk And 12 cents per Gig
Just a wisker cheap. I don't know if the buring time would pay for this. (ie more disk changes).
Now copying basic raw calc about 3-4 changes if we say worsed to mactchup it is Dvd 76 cents Double cd 68 cents And in extra labor or extra time and it is verry close note this is over priced but this is worset case that you have to backup a dvd for some reson.
But it save you skin in a pinch.
But if you're putting programs or even DivX movies on a CD, believe me, you want that error-correcting information.
Which is why you encode your Divx movies not into AVIs, but into OGM ogg file containers. Not only do they have error correction, so you can use 800 meg mode 2 cds, but they have multiple audio track, multiple subtitle track, and chapter support. Divx 5 with Vorbis audio, subtitles and chapters, and you got near dvd quality on one 800 meg cd. Its great, and not used nearly as much as it should be.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
After reading you parent post, and now this one, I have concluded that you know absolutely nothing about computers.
On a k6-2 350, with a voodoo3 video card and 128M RAM, running Redhat 8.0 I have never only seen the windows being drawn when I am running a ton of stuff. On a 2000+ with a gf3ti200 or radeon 9500pro and 512M RAM, running Redhat 9.0 or Mandrake 9.1 I have never seen windows being drawn.
You really need to learn how to configure your computer.... well, learn to do that after you learn how to shop for cheaper components.
Now my Two Towers SVCD will fit on one CD instead of four! And I didn't have to shell out 299+ for a DVD-R
> Do a google search
I DID a google search and can't find anything that describes the difference. I searched for "DVD-RAM DVD+RAM" and other such +/- combos, but the only thing I got returned to me was adverts & places to buy drives that handle those formats. No real information.
Try some of these:
//m
I need (no I won't go into it) more than 64 character filenames. This is a luser problem, I have nothing to do with it. I was looking into the Romeo FS which does 128, but is deprecated from mkisofs. What happened to it? What's wrong with it, and why doesn't anyone use it anymore?
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
You're right, I must've thought of something else. Audio CDs do have error detection and error correction codes, just like CD-ROMs. However, their size is nowhere near the size of the 'user data' within a frame, so that's one more reason why doubling capacity by ditching error correction and detection bits is absolutely impossible.
but what do i know, i'm just a model.
On Monday December 23, @11:23AM (#4944736) you said: Maybe this is the start of a crossover -- Vin Diesel meets Lawrence Fishburn, Carrie Ann Moss and Keanu Reeves. Scary.... between Vin and Keanu, there's gonna be a lot of "whoa"-type dialogue. THIS WAS HILARIOUS! -->LMAO!!!!!-- -fendomar