Jump to content

t1470258

Members
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

t1470258's Achievements

ISF Newbie

ISF Newbie (1/5)

  1. Hi, The attachments show a discovery burn under win7.32 with every possible application closed. Settings are included as a reg(txt) file to examine as well as log and graph files. If you look the graph speed falls below 4x from time to time through the entire burn yet no buffer recovery whatsoever. But DEVICE buffer (2mb) also falls to %6 at same speed drops without buffer underrun. I've done the DMA thing explained here twice yet no cure. Real burns suffer more than this "Discovery" mode with more speed falls yet all DVD's pass all read tests with 3rd party applications... My questions are: - Can I Fix/Improve this? - How much this effects my Burn Quality? Thanks... ATAPI_DVD_DC_16X8X5_103_SUNDAY-30-JANUARY-2011_23-35_MCC-004-00_8x_IMGBURN_DISCOVERY_IMAGE.ibg ImgBurn.log ImgBurn.reg
  2. Hi, I tried ImgBurn v2.4 and must say I'm disappointed compared to Nero. Although @ first ImgBurn seems superior to Nero, some things left behind makes one wonder why? Among others I'd like to ask these: - Although ImgBurn offers "move files up/down" options it does nothing at all. No matter where you "move" your files, files are burned regardless of your choice but due to "alphabetical order". I learned it after burning 10+ DVDs where Nero performs as expected... - One other thing, although ISO+Joilet selected and there're more longer filenames present, ImgBurn simply cuts filename of some files on its own without giving any warning like Nero or any other respectable burner does. At the end you either accept wrong names or burn twice to correct... I know ImgBurn is not an commercial product and Lightning UK is doing his best to put this program. Poking around the program reveals the effort and greatness of options. Yet IMHO before implementing "many many" options to a program, ImgBurn should does what it is expected to do without failures first... Lastly ImgBurn stands out amongst every freeware I've tried yet falls behind due to these kind of unexpected results behind commercial burners. I know it's "take it or leave it" yet one mustn't misunderstand my criticism where I aim just to help this program get better and better... Thanks ;-)
  3. I'm really sorry about the title but I've read many many suggestions here where almost all of it are just rejected which scares me to suggest anything at all... Anyway, here are them: - A page linked from 'front page' telling what'll be planned to be implemented within upcoming versions. Including major 'not to be implemented' requests, just helps LUK by reducing number of these feature requests... - Even I've read your file "priority / order / queue" rejection topic I must add that's something needed for regular uses too. Like many other I've been keeping my films not in DVD-Video format but Video files in PC format. Ensuring the position of these files at faster tracks not only helps DVDROM but also noise levels. I also am against overburning & usually fill up to 4.2gb. But outer tracks are much more susceptible to fingerprints, scratches etc... even if you care for it. So ability of placing critical data is an unignorable good feature. (btw many of us simply can't afford Plextor + scratch-proof Verbatim + Imation Stakka kind of suggestions of other topics) - As a cosmetic makeup: All 'modes' can be tabbed where curvy arrow shows or some kind of toolbar for a lot easier access. (rightmost arrow shows how they can look, not suggesting to replace others) As I've read, I'm also aware not to steal LUK's time for implementing not really needed or otherway solveable problems described in many requests here. I suggest priorities because within a lifetime of burner it'll be needed sooner or later. Also I don't think it's to diffucult to implement since you're already sorting files (LBA placement). I believe, adding two other options, high & low, to build->files->right-click and placing the files taking these into consideration, just solves it. (btw one might suggest to solve priority by 'iso builders' but 3rd party apps for simple things like these makes the burning process more complicated then it's supposed to be.) As I'm writing I've already guessed the outcome from this thread but I wrote it anyway not just to share my opinion on this great freeware but also pay my regards to LUK for such dedication, effort and uncommercial approach... ImgBurn is already a great application of its owner. Suggestions are merely to improve it to be better but not to be a bloatware... Thank you LUK...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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