Text 20066, 33 rader
Skriven 2006-08-03 13:36:10 av Jeff Guerdat (1:123/789.0)
  Kommentar till text 20063 av JAY EMRIE (1:123/140)
Ärende: Homebrewed !
====================
JAY EMRIE -> TOM WALKER wrote:
 JE>>> No not really. Today every copy prog. I have used completely reads
 JE> the
 JE>>> drive to be copied and then asks for a blank CD. No need for two
 JE>>> devices.

 TW>> That is a carry over form the Single Floppy Drive systems. BUT of course
 TW>> in hte dace of copying DVD's you need enough Hard drive space for the
 TW>> Temp copy the program puts on the hard drive.
 TW>> While I don't do much Disk Copying in case I do I have both a DVD-ROM
 TW>> and a DVD/CD RW in one of my machines. They are on Different ATA
 TW>> controllers of course.

 JE> Stop and think about it for a second. Copying from one CD to another
 JE> without reading the entire drive first would mean reading a portion of
 JE> the copy from CD, then writing that to a new CD, then repeating until the
 JE> process is completed. Doing a complete read first, then a complete write
 JE> requires less alternate R/W cycles, thus less chance of errors and
 JE> actually less total operation time.

If the input drive can keep up with the output drive, the copy process 1) reads
every used block on the source disc and 2) prevents the need from buffering the
data, increasing speed while not decreasing reliability.  In the bad old days,
such a copy could be risky since the source may have problems, creating retries
and the destination would buffer underflow.  These days, virtually any drive
will support re-syncing on a buffer underflow, giving you a usable copy
regardless of (successful) retries.

Copying a disc, especially a DVD, on my laptop is painful compared to using 2
drives on the desktop...

--- Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719)
 * Origin:  (1:123/789.0)