LIGHTNING UK!

Go back into Read mode with that source disc in the drive and copy + paste the disc info from the box on the right please. Do the ImgBurn burnt discs at least play on the PC ok?

You got the cheapo Verbatim discs ('UMEDISC-DL1-64' MID), you need the proper MKM-003-00 ones.

Put the disc in the drive and switch to Read mode. It'll list all of that info in the 'Source' box. Correct, file system support is a software thing and nothing to do with the hardware. 2.50 and 2.60 take mirror copies of certain file system descriptors. They don't take up much space, but if you're a couple of sectors over the disc capacity, switching to 2.01 or below might allow it to fit. 2.50 and 2.60 also can't be read by XP or earlier OS's without the aid of a 3rd party driver.

When I tested them all (many moons ago), madFlac did the best job - hence why that's the one I've recommended to everyone ever since and why that's the one mentioned in the guide. All the filters needed to do was allow me to take a flac file (I'd created from a wav) and decode it back to a wav file with bit perfect accuracy... i.e. so it matched the original wav file. Very few filters would do that, but madFlac did it just fine.

Having looked at your logs, I couldn't actually see one where you'd burn anything to a disc. All it shows you doing is making a disc image file. The program does show that you were creating a DVD video disc image of sorts, that it was region free and encoded for the 'PAL' tv system. Is that right for where you live? Assuming you did actually burn a disc (and it verified ok), try playing it with a software player on your PC.

Ooooh you're in Build mode now, doing an mp3 (data) disc! Sorry, I'd assumed you were doing a proper audio cd still with the cue file. Files are always burnt alphabetically in build mode. Keep the tracks in separate folders with the artist + album name. I.e. How they are on your PC. You don't even need to drag the tracks over to the source box, just the folders would do. Use advanced input mode if you want more control over the folder structure on the disc.

Yes, that's the standard one. The decoding of the tracks is an external thing and it's all down to the DirectShow filters I'm afraid. ImgBurn burns exactly what they provide it with. It's hard for me to visualise exactly what you're doing and what you're seeing regarding the track ordering. When you add a bunch of files in one go, they'll be added in alphabetical order. Normally that wouldn't cause a problem... and it doesn't sound like it should be for you either if you're adding them a CD at a time. It should just be listing them as track 1-x of CD 1, then track 1-x of the 2nd CD you add. There is a button you can click to order the tracks by track number (as specified in their metadata), but it's certainly not done automatically.

Tools -> Settings -> Device -> Eject Tray After... -> Write

It's still not working?

Yup, they're the ones. I just saved a project, changed those 3 options (data type/file system/udf revision), loaded it again and it set them back just fine.

I'm not sure what to say... it works fine here. Open the ImgBurn.ibb with notepad and just double check there's something in it that looks as if it'll change the option you're talking about.

It could be the 'lav' filter as that isn't a standard one.

There's no reset, no. It loads the settings when the program starts and never looks at them again. New disc simply clears the disc layout. Loading a project file should change the settings to whatever was saved in the project file. If it isn't doing that, it's broken lol

Leave it alone (on calculate optimal), that info is read from the .DVD file.

You'd have to check which filters are being used for decoding the mp3s. When making the cue, right click one of the mp3s you've added and click the menu option to show the directshow filter list. Let us know what it says.

Specify that correct file system option via the command line, or just change what's configured in the GUI before you start your batch file.

I'm sure the extended directors cut will have the scene you're looking for. Play.com only have 2 listed.. the normal version and the extended directors cut version. It's on ebay for £10 too.

The 'W' drives don't work.

I don't see why the network would be slower, you'd only be accessing the same physical file, be it from a network share or once wrapped up in an ISO and then mounted via a virtual optical drive. You could also give VMware direct access to the physical hdd the .tib file is stored on. The manual *is* wrong, it's talking about changing things on the ISO9660 tab (step 4) when you aren't even including the ISO9660 file system in the image you're creating (as per step 3). Well ok, it's not wrong, wrong, but it's getting you to do things which have no effect on the resulting ISO image.

Acronis recovery media has network support doesn't it? So can't you just point it at a network share on your PC where that 360gb file is? Oh and btw, the options on the ISO9660 tab don't do anything if ISO9600 isn't being included as a file system! You're just using UDF, so that guide is wrong.

ImgBurn is not the tool for this job. Sorry! You'd probably want whatever hdd tool Acronis has out these days.

Get a card using the silicon image chipset if you want to go that route - a 3512 or similar. It'll be cheaper than a new PC. You should find them on eBay without too much trouble.

That sounds normal to me. If you want to backup the ISO, use build mode instead of write mode.

What are you hoping to achieve by wrapping such a large file up in an ISO? You'll just end up with another 360gb file that you can't do anything with - unless they've suddenly started doing 500gb disc that I don't know about ?! Files that size belong on hard disks, not optical discs. If you want to back it up over loads of discs, you'll need to split it up into smaller disc sized chunks and burn each one individually. Personally, I'd stick to just storing it on a spare hdd or two.

People don't *want* adverts every 10 minutes during tv shows but this the world we live in. Companies want to advertise their software and make people aware of it. Developers are always happy to make a bit of extra cash. SweetLabs Inc (creators of the OpenCandy platform) basically just sell advertising space within a program installer and compensate the developer of that software accordingly. The software you're offered changes, as does the design of the offer screens. There's always a way to opt out though.