Jump to content

AlbertEinstein

Members
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About AlbertEinstein

  • Rank
    ISF Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    United States
  1. "How long do you want me to fry. 5 years? 10 years? You want to play 'kick the dog' for the rest of your life?" I give up. Please do tell.
  2. I'll give a shot. My theory is that because this is such a great freeware burning solution that someone (I don't know who, ;)) is soliciting or waiting for offers and releasing a newer version of the software would impact the value of those offers. I know I wouldn't pay for a software package that was 2 days newer than the last free version versus a software package that was updated 5+ years ago. That's my theory. I could be wrong.
  3. This question has never been answered. I'm still curious about it. This is a great software application. I have a theory about why there hasn't been an update released in 5+ years. I can share it if anybody wants to hear it? Oh, and it's definitely not because the software is bug-free.
  4. The "Disk Layout Editor" shows the incorrect ICONs for the related files. For example, I have mostly .ISO image files in a project and their corresponding .SHA1 files. The .ISO files show a Steam ICON and the .SHA1 files show a "Sims 2" ICON. Both of these are related to gaming. I'm not sure if that matters or it's just by coincidence. Also, more generally, I am wondering if a new version of ImgBurn would be released anytime in the near future that fixes some persistent bugs like these. It looks like it's been 5 years since the last release. It seems like an awfully long time to go to between releases. Features aside, there has to be more than a few bugs that could be done away with in a new maintenance release. Thanks for reading! ***EDIT***: I did exit out of ImgBurn all together. Then I re-launched ImgBurn and reloaded my "Most Recent Project". This fixed the improper ICON associations for the time being. So, this must be something that happens dynamically when certain steps are taken in alignment with the stars.
  5. I am too. I didn't think it would "really" work. The disc becomes unreadable at about 75% through the ImgBurn process. So, your software is imaging fine for a long time until it starts getting near the outer edges of the disc. Then, it just becomes a nightmare. But on the other hand, since I know that standard DVD players just ignore read errors so you can enjoy your movie even with scratches, it does make sense in a way. Maybe my burner is special in that it behaves the same way using the File Explorer. Or maybe the credit is all due to File Explorer by ignoring the read errors in a different way.
  6. I'll try it, thanks. EDIT: Wow, it worked. You are a genius. Thank You!!! It's a bit mind-boggling how easy the work-around was. My method was killing off my optical drive faster than I wanted too. It's already old enough. No reason for me to kill it on purpose.
  7. I've tried several times to rip an image of a standard DVD movie disc to my hard disk drive. In "Settings->Read" I've set: Read Errors->Software Retries to 0, (checked) Hardware Retires: to 0, and (checked) Ignore Read Errors. Still, the software seems to engage in retries anyway. Is there a fast easy way to rip a standard DVD movie disc with the ImgBurn software that doesn't take hours wasting time on retries? The funny part is, I've watched the movie with the scratches and one can never even detect it's not a perfect copy as the DVD players handle the errors/scratches without a single hiccup. I wish the imaging process was the same. Take what's good and skip the bad, fast as you can. After so many minutes of optical disc drive grinding I just abort the operation. Any tips for me?
  8. Alas, after another reboot, my LG burner lives on. I think it was just playing dead so I would let it live out the rest of it's days in peace. I've put it back to work and it's approximately half way through another successful burn (fingers crossed).
  9. Good question, maybe it's the same reason Intel and AMD sell overclockable processors. They sell them guaranteed to work at a rated speed but if you are an enthusiast and want to try your hand at faster speeds you can (on the overclockable models, that is). In other words, as a producer of goods, you always want to under promise and over deliver, versus over promising and under delivering. That's the absolute worst thing you can do. But like you I'm just not sure whether those media descriptors are created on the fly by the drive itself or they are already pre-written to the media. Maybe somebody else can clear this up for us. **EDIT**: I think your absolutely right though. Those media descriptors appear to be for the hardware itself and not the media.
  10. I was just curious if the drive was able to write faster than the rated speed of the media because it's an extra special drive or because there were faster media descriptors on the media already, but it's no big deal.
  11. I just tried writing to this virgin BD-R (referenced in above post) and the software/system/burner froze up at the "Reserving Track" step. I waiting for about 5 minutes to see if anything changed (it never did) and then unplugged my SATA power cable from the physical BD-R burner so that ImgBurn didn't try to do something that permanently damages this disc also. I closed ImgBurn (well actually had to kill the process), reconnected the SATA power cable to the BD-R burner, rebooted Windows 10 and now the drive is not even recognized by the system. This burner is going on 9 years old now (purchased at the end of 2010), IIRC. "It's dead Jim!"?
  12. But that's what I'm asking. Your saying that your Verbatim BD-R rated at 6X on the label (or physical media surface) can be burned at 12x on your Pioneer drive. Have you used ImgBurn to see the highest rated burn speed per the actual descriptors on the media itself and not just the packaging or physical media surface print? Or are you saying that the burner's firmware can write faster than the fastest rated descriptors pre-written on the media if it wants too?
  13. But the real question is do those Verbatim media have media descriptors for those faster speeds? I'm assuming that no matter what the burner brand is it has to have a media descriptor. I'm guessing this is something along the lines of the manufacturer guaranteeing a minimum safe burn speed on the label but having extra descriptors for those who have a capable burner? Or are just adventurous.
  14. Is there missing data still? This data is for a brand new Optical Quantum 25GB BD-R I just pulled off a newly opened spindle of 25 discs. #2 off the stack. I bought this spindle over a year (or more) ago. It's interesting to me that the label that hugs the spindle says these are for "1-4x SPEED" but there's a couple of descriptors above showing that it will burn at 6x and 8x also. You gotta love a producer that under promises and over delivers.
  15. Yep, I'm not sure why. I tried UDF 2.50 and 2.60 both. Here's a screenshot: On the other hand, "Volume Set" allows 128 characters. But that's distinct from "Volume Label". **EDIT**: I figured it out. If you disable Unicode support under the "Advanced" tab then you can get 128 characters for the "Volume Label". Unicode takes 2 bytes per character. Problem solved!
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.