Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

ThaCrip's Achievements

ISF Member

ISF Member (2/5)

  1. I suspect someone will say that's likely the problem since it appears when it comes to laptop burners they are so-so compared to proper desktop burners and I think it's especially true given you are apparently using quality DVD media (i.e. "DVD-R (Disc ID: MCC 03RG20)"), assuming those are the real Verbatim media. If it's pretty much just the movie itself, off the top of my head, 1.8GB seems a bit too small as for a 3hr movie you would generally want it to take up as much of that space as possible which could increase video quality. p.s. but personally with today's tech, it's more optimal to 'find' that movie in a decent bit rate 720p/1080p x264 variation as the quality will be better and if you got say a computer or laptop with a HDMI port, you can play it from there to your TV in HD quality which is hands down better than DVD at this point in time. but considering how old DVD tech is, it's not bad for SD video. because when I play my movies it's typically from my computer etc to the TV using the HDMI connection. just make sure the TV connection is using the TV's 1080p (1920x1080) res as on Linux, by default it seems to select a lower res, but I can fix it easily enough so it's using 1920x1080 to get max image quality, otherwise it looks noticeably worse.
  2. This post should cut through the BS since here is the MD5/SHA-1/SHA-256 hashes of a CLEAN ImgBurn v2.5.8.0 installer ( SetupImgBurn_2.5.8.0.exe ; "3.0 MiB (3,101,913 bytes)")... MD5 = 4bf2b8f4b46385bfda4d65e423cfb868 SHA-1 = 6a3d20796e1fcd4169d5d339af6e491dcea3367c SHA-256 = 49aa06eaffe431f05687109fee25f66781abbe1108f3f8ca78c79bdec8753420 on a side note... there are a fair amount of stuff people post this kind of info for random program, but I suspect it's largely ignored as people just assume what they download is safe. NOTE: you only need to match to one of those as if it matches one, it will match the rest. I just posted more there as people can use whatever they prefer. but what Lightning UK basically said is correct, he only has so much control over things whether he likes it or not (same would basically apply to myself and the next random person). it's nothing against anyone, as like he said, it's just a fact of life. one has to take reasonable measures to ensure they don't install any program on their computer that could potentially be including unwanted junk in it. p.s. https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/imgburn.html (I checked both links here and they are good as ImgBurn has been downloaded there over 9.2 million times and even says on that site "ImgBurn on MajorGeeks is a clean installer without OpenCandy distributed with permission.")) ; they have the same one from a download I got years ago as it's the same hashes as what I am using (on my Linux system). but, as usual, if you want to be 100% sure run a hash check on it to make sure it matches what I posted above and then you can be sure it's clean basically.
  3. Alternatively... IMGBurn works on Linux, which if you are still using a old OS like WinXP/Win7 online, unless you must use those OS's for whatever reason, it's best to switch to Linux if you can't use Windows 10 or newer since you will have a secure internet machine.
  4. I suspect if you try to install non-standard kernels in Mint it 'may' act up (which I would avoid as a general rule) but the stuff I mentioned is officially acknowledged by the Mint team (as I have seen mods there on their forums suggest that sort of stuff to people here and there with newer hardware). with 'apt install linux-oem-22.04c' and they even have a one with less support, which is newer than the LTS(5.15) but not as new as the one I mentioned(6.1), in the 'Update Manager > View > Linux Kernels' of 5.19 kernel, which they only support to Aug 2023. but soon they will probably have a newer one than 5.19 offered in the Update Manager for those who want it (it does not install by default as those who are on 5.15 will stay on that kernel series unless they install a newer kernel). but I also heard the Mint team say that's it's best to stick with the LTS kernel unless you have a real reason to use a newer one, like you need it for support of newer hardware etc. so I guess a 'safer bet' would be if your system is supported by 5.15 (Nov 2021 released) it's probably best. still, I would be confident newer kernels (the ones Mint supports) will be okay on Mint 21.x series to. but like you said, 'there's a distro out there for everyone'. Fair enough. but one thing about lighter DE's, less stuff to act up, high end hardware or not, it will run well. I am more of the mindset once the interface looks 'good enough', which I feel Xfce and other similar ones are, I prefer to side with speed/reliability over a fancier interface. but I get there is no definitive answer here as it's still mostly preference. but I guess with certain hardware, it might easily handle the more fancy interfaces. but what I like about Mint's DE's (Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce) is they have a traditional Windows like feel to them, which I think is always a safe bet. but in terms of RAM... I suspect it's generally not much either way with DE's, at least in regards to Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce (or the like) variations. so it's pretty much a non-issue from the RAM aspect. but short of lighter users (who may be able to get by with 4GB of RAM), 8GB of RAM is pretty much a minimum nowadays. I got 16GB of RAM (I had 8GB from May 2012 until 2020 when I bought some used DDR3 ram (2x 8GB) for my main PC, which it's now at the limit of the motherboard). I would probably say 8GB or 16GB is the sweet-spot for most people (and probably makes up a large portion of computers still in use, with some 4GB of RAM PC's as PC's that don't have at least 4GB of RAM are probably straight up ancient) and more than 32GB of RAM is probably overkill for the vast majority of people. Yep. it's showing it's age ; but it's still usable as I tend to roughly use a measuring stick of when doing fairly basic tasks if it's routinely pegging the CPU to 100% or thereabouts then you know it's truly ancient hardware and it's pretty much time to move on (like pretty much a underpowered laptop I have HP2000 with a AMD E-300, but I mainly use this (which has Mint 21.1-Xfce on it) for playing movies on TV's from .mkv files). but just browsing internet etc, CPU usage is not too high on that ASUS A8N32-SLI board. it's also limited to 4GB of RAM MAX, which is what's in it (4x 1GB DDR 400Mhz) as I would say the RAM would be more of a issue than CPU will be for general usage, 'if' I had to use that on a regular basis like I do my main PC. but I only use it once in a while, so it's still passable. but with that motherboard I got in early 2006 (the high end 2005 tech) is a ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe (socket 939) and originally had a single core CPU in it but I upgraded it to a dual core back in 2010, which at the time was still my main PC until May 2012 (which is when I got my current main PC). that old 2006 board currently has a AMD Athlon X2 3600+ dual-core 2.0GHz, but I got it overclocked to 2.3GHz. but this setup is a backup desktop, which I generally don't use much but it's nice to hang around for older hardware as while it has SATA II ports, it does have some IDE connections to so I can use my old CD/DVD burners that have IDE connections on them (and a small amount of old IDE hard drives I got if I need to). AMD was better than Intel at the time (like early 2006), but shortly after I got that, Intel came out with the Core 2 Duo CPU's and, to my knowledge, Intel has been ahead of AMD ever since in terms of performance per core. but prior to that AMD was ahead of Intel for probably around 5 years (like with gaming etc). my primary PC has a i5-3550 (runs at 3.5GHz under full load) as that's 11 year old CPU tech (although I had a i3-2120 CPU (2-core/4-thread) in that from when I got it until the year 2020 when I got a near dirt cheap ($20) used i5-3550 (4-core/4-thread) which was a solid upgrade for barely any money). in fact, my current main PC (ASUS board etc) is the longest I ever owned a primary PC as it just crossed the 11 year mark last month (my previous record high was 6 years and 2 months (March 2006 until May 2012)) and still works well although the on-board sound on it died back in 2020 but I just got one of those cheap USB sound cards with a 3.5mm jack on it to restore the sound and then just disabled the on-board sound in the BIOS/UEFI. I plan on sticking with this setup for the foreseeable future since it does pretty much everything I need. but I see your point with USB 2.0 given it's limited to about 30MB/s transfers where as a typical USB3 (or SATAII/III (probably even SATA I on some level)) will allow the hard drive to work at maximum speed which, unless one has a small capacity hard drive it can probably do around 80-100MB/s+ (even on smaller capacity HDD's 50-60MB/s or so)). I think the USB3 connection itself can do up to 300MB/s at least, or maybe up-to 500-600MB/s, as I know SATA II is limited to 300MB/s and SATA III can do up-to 500-600MB/s. but good point about the older hardware for gaming machine as once they are setup you don't have to mess with them, especially if it's pretty much a offline machine.
  5. Yeah, even on the newest Mint 21.x series, the default kernel is 5.15 which that kernel was released in Nov 2021 (first Mint 21.x series release was about mid-2022), so it's got a little age on it. but one can install a bit more recent kernels to it if needed. so I guess it depends on how new ones hardware is. but if one needs a bit newer kernel, the newest one I see available in it is 6.1 which appears to be from Dec 2022 ( apt install linux-oem-22.04c ), so roughly a half year ago. While 'Cinnamon' is sort of their main version, Cinnamon/MATE had a issue on at least two out of the three computers I have in regards to video playback (720p/1080p x264 and the like) with Celluloid paired with MPV for hardware accelerated video playback. but Xfce works without issue which is why at this point and for quite a while now I settled on Xfce. it's especially noticeable on a slower laptop I have etc. even my main PC has the issue but it's not as obvious and I can temporarily fix it by restarting Cinnamon, but then the issue returns roughly a day later (I generally leave my primary PC on all of the time). but with Xfce I simply don't have the issue, even after a lot of time passes. currently my system up time on my main PC running Mint 21.1-Xfce is 74 days and counting. even in terms of basic interface... while the three offered by Mint (Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce) are similar, I never cared for MATE's interface as I think Cinnamon/Xfce are more similar/better, but ultimately I had to side with Xfce as I think it's a safer bet across a wider range of hardware. but I suspect with Linux variations in general... there are probably quirks and preferences etc. so it's hard to definitely say one is 'the best', but I would guesstimate Mint (Xfce) is probably one of the better choices for users coming from Windows to Linux (assuming their hardware works on it). but from what you say, it appears you prefer a interface that's a bit more fancy at the tradeoff of being more resource hungry. personally I think DE's like Xfce look good enough and are on the lighter side as it does the important stuff well enough with a simple/clean interface. I forgot to mention... on that backup computer with Mint/Win7, it cannot run any Windows newer than Windows 7 as while Win10 32-bit installs, it's unstable, and Win10 64-bit outright won't install as it complains about lack of nx-bit. but I am not too surprised as the motherboard is basically high-end tech from 2005 (I built it in early 2006). Yeah, I already did over 3 years ago now at this point. it was only some odd months ago I did the Linux(120GB SSD SATA)/Win7(on 80GB IDE HDD) on my backup computer setup. but it boots to Linux (Mint) by default.
  6. Well when it comes to general audio playback, I just always have Foobar2000 open and you can change songs easily enough through it's GUI. as for playing back songs, I always load the main Foobar2000 and then drag-and-drop songs into whatever tab you want and play. even in regards to general playback, through Foobar2000's settings, I made it so you can rewind/fast forward with the arrow keys. spacebar is play/pause etc. but the Foobar2000 program needs to be the active window for it to work. I even have the 'right click (like right click a file(s) in Foobar2000) > Convert' section setup with shortcuts which makes it easier to convert from FLAC to MP3 etc in the future. this is actually pretty easy once it's setup as you open Foobar2000, drag-and-drop files into it's own tab etc, then select them all (or whatever you want to convert, right click and select Convert etc. also, after setting up Foobar2000 through PlayOnLinux, through my Mint 21.1-Xfce installation on the 'Keyboard > Application Shortcuts' section I setup a keyboard shortcut to load Foobar2000 by pressing CTRL+SHIFT+F. this is not straight forward/easy but it's not too difficult. but I just generally have PlayOnLinux create a desktop shortcut to whatever Windows program I want to use as then it's simple enough. I noticed on some Wine installations, like through the standard system install itself, that sometimes it does not affiliate double clicking a exe to run it (so I got to use terminal etc) but I noticed installing it from the official Wine website (winehq.org) seems to automatically affiliate exe's with Wine to where it acts a bit more like Windows where you just double click to run a exe. but even with the official WineHQ site install, I also suggest installing the 'apt install wine-desktop-files' as this creates shortcuts on your start menu for easier access to 'Configure Wine' (instead of having to do 'winecfg' from terminal) etc. so while Foobar2000 does not have a fancy looking interface, it's practical function is where it shines as it does the basics well (maybe some slight tweaking needed) if you don't mind loading up the program to play your music. p.s. but with FSTAB I mainly did that so that hard drives are always mounted to the same location regardless of whether the /dev/sda changes or not (which it might on random reboots). Yeah, I am not much of a fan of dual-booting in general as it's a safer bet to either run Windows or Linux exclusively. even on the rare occasion I need to play with Windows on my Linux machine, I just run it through a virtual machine (QEMU/KVM etc) but with virtual machine, while it will probably be okay, I suspect there are some instances where ones has to be running Windows on the actual machine for it to work. but I imagine this generally won't be the case (I have one thing that requires the real Windows though, but fortunately I rarely use that device that requires Windows). p.s. the only dual-boot system I do have of the three computers I got is my backup desktop where Linux Mint runs from a 120GB SSD and Windows 7 is on a 80GB IDE. the Windows 7 I do have installed was installed from a custom/updated to Jan 2023 ISO I made with a 'Integrate7' script by a user on another forum called 'wkeller'. it's about 2.1GB larger than the official stock Win7 SP1 from Microsoft which I think was from 2011 or so. I know Windows 7 support was officially gone as of Jan 2020, but it did get updates until pretty much Jan 2023 but was not easy to do etc. but I only have that installed on what will likely be a rare use occasion where I have to run a very limited amount of Windows games on that old computer since, in short, they don't work on that computer since the Linux driver is using the older 'radeon' driver instead of what more modern gaming on Linux uses on the AMD side of things, which is 'amdgpu' driver. but those old games I got on that work fine on Linux on my primary PC but it's using a proper NVIDIA driver etc. Yeah, I see. I don't use much Windows software, mainly just Foobar2000/ImgBurn and maybe a little bit beyond this (along with some games), but the Windows software I do use, there just ain't a good Linux equivalent (maybe with burning software on some level, but even with that ImgBurn is more optimal), especially with Foobar2000. I see. but since you are still fairly heavily using Windows, I totally understand with keeping NTFS. in fact, when I made the switch to Linux in Jan 2019 full-time I held off about 1 full year after that (so to around Jan 2020) before changing pretty much all of my hard drives from NTFS to EXT4 just to make sure I was going to stick with Linux in the long term. but I did notice some issues on Linux with NTFS hard drives, like with torrents it would download to 100% but there was fairly often a tiny bit of that data I had to pause, do a 'force recheck' and then it would find a bit of missing data and then when I started download again it would finish and generally be okay. but on EXT4 I never experienced that issue once. so while I think 'NTFS' on Linux is 'mostly okay', there can potentially be weird quirks like this and what you experience etc. anyways... while I get there is a lot of Linux distro's out there, so it might be difficult to find one to settle on for some people, I never had a real reason to dump Linux Mint as it's been around a long time, is based on Ubuntu (which is one of the more used Linux distros as while there might not be strictly any 'standard' when it comes to Linux, I would say Debian/Ubuntu (both can use '.deb' files) based ones are probably as close as it gets) and has support for nearly 5 years each major release as it seems a fair amount of others might be in the 2-3 years of support cycle. also, while I get many Linux OS's can claim to be 'stable', I would be willing to bet with Linux Mint things are more likely to just continue working vs some other variations.
  7. No. but ill make it clearer (and with much less words)... -DVD9(8.5GB) to DVD5(4.7GB) (movies) using Devede works as expected (no stutter. works well) (with the libdvdcss2 installed of course). -720p/1080p x264 (movies) using Devede to convert to standard DVD (4.7GB) video format has a little stutter like I was saying. p.s. the original 720p/1080p x264 movies I have work perfect (no stutter). so the stutter issue occurs during the conversion with Devede (source file being 720p/1080p x264) to standard DVD format. For all of my general audio playback/conversion I use Foobar2000 (paired with the Encoder Pack... https://www.foobar2000.org/encoderpack ) on Linux as that's simply better than any native Linux program. I heard of Mp3Tag but I never bothered with software like that since once I setup my FLAC files, which I can do in Foobar2000, everything works well after that during say FLAC to MP3 etc conversions (with a little tweaking in Foobar2000 itself depending on how you like things setup with file names it creates etc). but I noticed occasionally, in regards to 'accessing drives and what not', you may have to tweak things. like on a game (Windows game running on Linux) I am running a graphics enhancement mode on, in the ini configuration files, it has Windows drive letters (say D:\Games\GameNameHere\ etc) and by default it won't be setup correctly. so I open 'Configure Wine (or winecfg from terminal) > Drives' section as this can be corrected here (along with some tweaks in the ini so it's looking for the mod files in the proper directory). even in regards to my save state in Foobar2000 with all of my music loaded with different tabs etc, like even if I backup that data, say format my system (or wipe the wine profile to start clean) etc, and restore the Foobar2000 profile save state, since drive letters will likely change in Wine, if you try playing music (from the previous profile data that you restored) it will probably fail since the drive letter won't match, but this can be corrected on that 'Drives' tab in Wine basically and then all of your tabs in Foobar2000 that you restored from your profile are working once again as expected. I got my additional hard drives mounted to the same point upon boot up (through '/etc/fstab' file using UUID etc)... like say '/media/1TBHDD' for example. so if my music is in some general folder on that hard drive and Foobar2000 can't see it, I just go to Wine's 'Drives' tab and select the proper drive letter Foobar2000 is expecting to see that music on (which you will know the drive letter that's needed by the error screen Foobar2000 shows when you try to play the music and it's not in the location Foobar2000 expects). so say Foobar2000 after profile restoration expects some music you are trying to play in a tab at D:\ etc etc, on the Configure Wine section on 'Drives', for 'Letter' you put "D:" and for target folder I put something like "/media/1TBHDD" (so to Wine it see's that 1TB HDD as the 'D' drive now) and then apply and now all of the tabs/music folder I had previously configured work well once again instead of having to redo it from scratch which can be a little time consuming. I setup the limited amount of Windows programs I use on Linux through PlayOnLinux as this keeps things separated from the standard system installed wine which I generally use for games. basically the system installed wine stores stuff in the default ".wine" folder in ones Home directory. with PlayOnLinux all of it's stuff goes to a different location... in ones home folder it's more easily accessed through 'PlayOnLinux's virtual drives' shortcut it creates. but it's basically stored more precisely at "~/.PlayOnLinux/wineprefix/" p.s. that Foobar2000 'encoder pack' is only needed if you plan on converting from say FLAC to MP3/AAC/Opus etc. but for proper Apple AAC conversion through Foobar2000 (which is the best AAC (AAC-LC)) you need to take additional steps for it to work (you need additional files) as it won't work simply by installing Foobar2000 and the Encoders Pack. but if you don't use AAC (AAC-LC) and just MP3 etc, a default install of Foobar2000 and the Encoders Pack will work.
  8. I did play around with that libdvdcss not all that long ago (roughly a year or two ago) and it did work for removing copy protection from a older movie DVD I had when playing around with it. I think I used it in combination with 'Devede' software when converting to standard 4.7GB DVD if I recall correctly. that Devede (apt install devede) is decent software but the only real problem I had with it is... when converting actual movie DVD's it worked as expected, but when converting from 720p/1080p x264 (h264) video files, while it worked, the final video on the DVD side of things had a bit of stutter in the final DVD output during playback and I could never figure out how to fix it (the source 720p/1080p x264 files worked perfectly (no stutter) as expected. so the stutter on the DVD side must have been some weird glitch during conversion). not that it was a big deal, since I don't use DVD for video playback anymore in general (maybe rarely), but it would have been nice to figure out just in case since while the final disc is watchable, there is consistent stutter throughout the video. like it plays fine, slight stutter, plays fine, stutter and continues to end of video file. off the top of my head, I want to say the very slight stutter occurred once every few seconds or so. but I suspect some people it might not bother, but that sort of stuff bothers me as it's noticeable instead of working perfectly like it's supposed to (like I say, the DVD9 to DVD5 worked perfectly though with no stutter). sort of that stutter issue I was happy with Devede as it even creates a ISO for you to burn/use. but if you are converting from say DVD9 (8.5GB) to DVD5 (4.7GB), I think Devede will work well for you, as like I said, when I converted from a real DVD, there was no stutter in the final video output by Devede. I just used the main movie file with a basic menu created by Devede in my testing. a moment ago (on Mint 21.1-Xfce which is based on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS) when issuing 'apt install libdvdcss' it shows (as I already installed it a while ago)... Note, selecting 'libdvdcss2' instead of 'libdvdcss' libdvdcss2 is already the newest version (1.4.2-dmo1). p.s. I use ImgBurn on Linux for all my general CD/DVD burning. it works once setup properly as you have to tweak a couple of things for it to work on Linux. like it has to run in WinXP mode on Wine and, off the top of my head, I think on Wine versions newer than v4 series or so, you have to change from ImgBurn's default ASPI driver to SPTI etc in ImgBurn's options otherwise it won't see your CD/DVD drives. but once you do this, it works well. I would avoid storing WAV for long term storage as FLAC is better and is about half of the storage space with identical sound quality since it's a lossless audio format. personally I don't worry too much about super precise audio CD backup, like people get with 'Exact Audio Copy' software (it's good software, as I am not dissing it, but it's probably a little overkill for most people), as the main thing is getting the song data from original CD (which is basically WAV) to FLAC format and then from there one always has a high quality source to convert to lossy formats (MP3/AAC/Opus etc) when needed. because the way I see it... as long as there is no obvious read errors when getting the basic song (WAV) data from the CD to ones hard drive, even if 'Exact Audio Copy' is technically a tiny bit better, in the real world, I highly doubt a person would be able to audibly detect any differences. like for example (especially if your audio CD don't have any obvious scratches etc)... Exact Audio Copy vs just copying the audio file(s) from ones file manager to hard drive. I am willing to bet they are pretty much the same in real world sound quality (assuming no obvious read errors). because CD audio already exceeds human hearing. because even decent bit rate lossy files people struggle to notice the difference between the lossless and lossy file and after a certain point they basically can't tell the difference and if they can't tell the difference between lossy to lossless it's pretty much guaranteed they ain't going to notice anything from Exact Audio Copy vs a standard copy/paste of WAV files from ones CD to hard drive (assuming no obvious read errors occur). so while I don't fault people using programs like Exact Audio Copy, as it's still good stuff at the end of the day, I think it's almost a obsession with people after a certain point with sound quality etc. like for example... standard audio CD's vs "HD" audio. it's totally pointless to waste space with HD audio because us humans can't tell the difference outright since standard Audio CD's that have been around since the 1980's already exceed our hearing ability. point being, it's basically impossible to improve on sound quality of standard Audio CD's to a difference that would actually matter to us humans.
  9. So the gist of it is the OP is trying to create a ISO from the VIDEO_TS folder so then he can mount the ISO through Windows with right click etc. but like dbminter said, "It sounds like the ISO's are definitely not compliant in some variety" which I imagine is the issue. it's been a long time since I played with that sort of stuff, and while I suspect there is easier ways with other windows software (but if there is, it's probably old software at this point), it appears one can create a ISO through terminal etc using something like... https://superuser.com/a/109223 & https://askubuntu.com/a/28071 etc
  10. Yeah. that's why I tend to prefer DVD because given they have lasted 10-20 years already, and if there is no obvious degradation with KProbe scan etc, chances are they are going to last at least decades, unless of course disc deterioration starts to hit a disc rapidly out of no where, which I would 'guess' is unlikely. but I guess on paper, since they went from CD to DVD to BD, while you get more data on each disc, they are all the same physical size so it's cramming more data into a smaller space, which at least theoretically, makes it more susceptible error (like read errors etc). In my opinion, that's largely a waste of time to re-copy to 'newer' CD/DVD's etc. but I do agree, as extra insurance, that besides the usual two copies on two different hard drives method (which is more practical in general since it's minimal effort and convenient and offers a reasonable level of protection against data loss), that having a one copy on say Verbatim media and another copy on Taiyo Yuden media offers that much more insurance as I do this occasionally, but I would never consider re-burning it given the current copies show no signs of degrading (which KProbe etc scans would show since you can keep original scan after burning, then compare it to a newer scan you do many years later). but after a certain point this stuff almost starts to become a bit obsessive, which is why I figure a good balance of things is the two hard drive stuff along with at least one copy on DVD media etc (although for super high importance stuff, two different kinds of DVD media for example are all that much better because the odds of both of those dying at the same time is probably slim enough). Yeah, I understand. because in terms of optical media, for really a large project, BD-R is more practical (given 25GB a disc vs 4.7GB). but 'may' be more risky in terms of longevity of discs and there is less drives to read it available to the masses etc. honestly though, if I had many TB's of data to backup, short of super high importance data, I would just stick to regular hard drives, just use more hard drives... like besides the usual two copies on two different hard drives, which is a good bare minimum convenient standard, just use more and keep some offline for extra insurance against viruses etc and accidental data deletion. hell, most of the data I backup I stick to the two hard drive method since it offers the best balance of convenience(like ease-of-backup/using that data)/data security. p.s. just speaking for myself... even for backing up digital photos (i.e. family photos etc) I noticed a good portion of what I have backed up, is a bit of excess as I could probably get rid of some pictures to save space since most pictures are nothing TOO special. but then I get as a side effect of this, it takes time (probably quite a bit depending on how much you have to sort though) to sort through these and tune it before burning to say DVD etc, which while it makes the final disc one burns of higher quality pictures/videos etc, the time it takes to do this can be a lot. so I guess one tries their best to balance things. I think a lot of the reason why BD-R never took off like CD/DVD is lack of general public using it since it seems many switched over to streaming etc. optical disc seem to be limited to a limited amount of people nowadays. the only reason I still use optical media is because I feel it's the all-around best alternative for backing up data for long term storage if you put hard drives aside. plus, optical media ain't prone to accidental data deletion etc. it's a nice way to permanently store data for at least years, but probably decades. I see. like one of those machines you don't like to touch since it's good for old school stuff. I totally get it p.s. speaking of old games, I got MAME (arcade emulator) setup on some of my PC's for playing my favorite fighting games, which are the arcade versions from the 1990's (which I used to play all besides MK1 in the arcades back in the 1990's), Mortal Kombat 1 through Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 (i.e. MK1/MK2/MK3/UMK3) and Killer Instinct as I have been playing around with these once again lately on my X-Arcade stick (which I bought back in the 2000's decade as it's the older serial port version which I got the adapter that converts it to the more modern USB connection). anyways, the games you mentioned I played those at one point in the last to (like back in the 1990's etc). my single favorite gaming experience would be Mafia (2002) which, while one could setup on a old Windows computer (as I do have this setup on a old computer running Windows 7 (also has Linux Mint on it)) as a backup, it works on my primary PC running Linux Mint computer through Lutris/Wine etc. Yeah, while there are plenty of choices (as there is no definitive answer)... I think Linux Mint is one of the safest choices for beginners and people in general (it's been around longer than most and stuff is more likely to 'just work' etc). because it's based on Ubuntu (the current Linux Mint 21.x series is based on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS) which is similar enough to Debian as these have been around a long time (Debian since 1993 and Ubuntu since 2004. Mint has been around since 2006) so are a bit more common/somewhat standard. but one area Mint shines over many others is the amount of time it's supported for as each major version is basically 2 years apart and is supported for pretty much 5 years... -Linux Mint v20.x (released about mid-2020) = supported until April 2025 -Linux Mint v21.x (released about mid-2022) = supported until April 2027 and if the pattern holds, which it probably while, Mint v22.x will be released about mid-2024 and supported until April 2029. the default kernel for newest Mint 21.x is currently 5.15 which that kernel was from Nov 2021. so as long as someones hardware is not too recent it should be okay. even if they need a newer kernel you can install newer ones on Mint through the OS itself. but generally... the Mint team suggests sticking to the kernel that comes with it unless you have a specific reason (like newer hardware support etc) to need a newer one. anyways, it seems a fair amount of other Linux variations only have support in the 2-3 years range before one would have to upgrade where as Mint is pretty much 5 years (technically it's not a full five years, but close enough).
  11. If these are standard 44.1/16-bit WAV files, you are better off converting them to FLAC since sound quality will be the same (since it's a lossless format) but roughly half of the file size etc. basically there is no real reason to burn WAV as a data disc for general data backup over FLAC (even if you need WAV for whatever reason in the future, it's easy to convert it back to WAV, and of course, no sound quality loss). but for your general situation... in the future, I suggest sticking to DVD recordable (Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden) as they are probably not as picky as BD-R stuff is in my estimations. I think BD-R is more of a question mark for longevity where as I think CD-R/DVD-/+R is more time proven and, like I always say, it's easier to find a drive that can read CD/DVD where as BD media is not widely adopted like CD/DVD was where just about everyone had one of those drives in the past at some point in the 2000's decade and thereabouts. so while I realize you only get 4.7GB(DVD-/+R) vs 25GB(BD-R), unless you have a lot of high importance data you need for long term storage, DVD is 'good enough' as for most of my backup I tend to opt for the more efficient two hard drive setup as this keeps ones chances of data loss low enough and it's far more convenient where as stuff I burn on DVD tends to be much more limited and is a nice alternative/insurance for a limited amount of high importance data I don't want to lose. and personally... I don't think M-DISC are worth the extra cost. even assuming they last a long time, the price is too inflated and decent quality CD/DVD media will likely last 'at least' decades in my experience given I checked the disc quality of some discs (largely Verbatim and some TY(Taiyo Yuden)) I burned around 10-15 years ago (I date my discs when I burn them so I know exactly when I burned them) with KProbe etc and they still scan well to this day (i.e. not even close to failure). so if you do get some DVD recordable media, after burning, while it's not required, if you are concerned with longevity it's a good idea to get a feel of the initial burn quality as the better they are initially the longer they should last in theory given, assuming they degrade more on the slow side, it will buy a person that much more time before read failure etc. p.s. the stuff I burn with IMGBurn (I use IMGBurn on Linux to burn stuff not all that long ago) reads okay on my Linux Mint computer. so I imagine if this reads okay, Windows 10 should have no issues reading a burned disc. I see you mentioned you got a 'WinXP' PC, unless you must keep WinXP on that computer for whatever reason, I suggest wiping the drive and installing some form of Linux (which is free) on it as you can still use ImgBurn on that if you want to.
  12. When I said CD's (meaning standard AUDIO CD's) can't be improved upon I meant strictly in terms of the sound quality they produce, since they already exceed human hearing abilities. sure, if you could carry lossless audio files (i.e. FLAC etc) made from standard audio CD's on a device that can play them, that's equally as good to and would be inline with what you said about it not skipping etc. but in regards to putting music on a flash stick and playing it in a car... technically, unless it can play lossless (FLAC etc) there would be some level of sound decline. although in practical real world use (which is where it really matters)... once a lossy file (i.e. MP3/AAC etc) reaches a certain point (like bitrate) us humans pretty much can't tell the difference especially when just sitting back and enjoying the music. but I like to always have a lossless source to convert to lossy files when needed since no matter what audio formats change to in the future, you always have a high quality source to convert from as FLAC will never get outdated simply because as long as it was ripped from a standard AUDIO CD the sound quality is already exceeding human hearing abilities. there are listening tests over on hydrogenaud.io website etc for people who like learning/reading up on this stuff. but what I am saying here is the gist of it. even LAME(MP3) @ V5 (130kbps average) scores pretty well in a public listening test to where I am confident many people would struggle to notice the different between that and the lossless source (FLAC or original audio CD and the like) and even those who can tell the difference, through ABX tests (which you can run on Foobar2000), it's not going to be a obvious difference when you are just sitting back and enjoying the music. but it's basically common knowledge (at least on that hydrogenaud.io site) that AAC(standard AAC-LC)/Opus do better than MP3 at lower bit rates. lets say lower bit rates are about 128kbps or less (but probably more around 96kbps and less). but at higher bit rates (say about 128kbps or higher or not all that much beyond this) it don't really seem to matter much in real world whether you choose MP3/AAC/Opus etc. Yeah, clearly longevity of the data storage is where optical media shines and is the primary reason I still like having them around for some level of high importance data backup. also, while I am sure BD-R offers more storage space for the price... it's initial investment costs etc and lack of drives out there are probably what I would say is the biggest problem with it compared to more standardized/widely used CD/DVD. plus, it's not been around as long as CD/DVD media so it's a bit less time proven and not only that you are packing a lot more data into the same physical space which just this alone makes me think it's more picky and 'may' be more prone to data corruption as time passes. especially if you count the non-standard 25GB BD-R media with more than one layer as I imagine dual layer (or higher) media is more susceptible to issues than single layer media. so even if I did use BD-R media, I would almost certainly stick strictly to the standard 25GB discs as they probably have wider compatibility vs 100GB BDXL etc types of discs and cost per disc is probably a lot more reasonable etc. but yeah, flash media is appealing due to convenience as it seems many opt for convenience over long term data storage as I would never trust flash based media over optical media for long term data storage, especially if flash based storage is a persons only data backup source. with that said, flash based storage can be a nice additional backup source to more typical long term storage on hard drives and optical media though. p.s. but like I said in the past... I generally avoid CD-R's for storing data (unless someone has a very limited amount of high importance data backup) because it's not as practical as DVD (given DVD's hold 6.7x the amount of data of a CD-R) and disc cost between CD/DVD is about the same and data reliability is probably similar between the two assuming one uses quality media.
  13. That's ultimately why CD/DVD is still a good option for long term data backup (I have a fair amount of DVD's from 10-15 years ago still working well today and scan well with KProbe which gives one a good ball park indication of burn quality etc) as long as one does not have a boatload of stuff to burn (lets say 'boat load' means TB's of data), it's practical. I never got into BD burning as it's not enough of a benefit for me to justify the initial investment cost and not only that CD/DVD are far more common/standardized among the masses to as it will be easier to find a drive that can read CD/DVD many years from now than BD discs since just about any optical drive will read DVD's and all will read CD-R's basically. all-in-all, I prefer 4.7GB DVD for more limited high importance data backup (in addition to typical hard drive backups). but besides a more limited amount of higher importance data I just backup data on regular hard drives since it offers the best storage space and reliability for the price for most data backup. p.s. in terms of CD-R's... personally I almost exclusively use these for that occasion I want to burn a standard audio CD (ImgBurn can even overburn these to as on the standard Verbatim CD-R's (100-pack CMC Magnetics media code for about $20 for 100 discs) I have successfully burned to basically 82min15sec(shows up as 82min12sec on my standard CD player from the early 1990's and plays to the end without issue)) since standard audio CD's are still the best all-around available physical format available as the sound quality can't be improved upon since it already exceeds human hearing abilities as all of that 'HD' audio is marketing BS and just wastes storage space as standard 44.1/16bit is already more than good enough.
  14. I see. that's nice and all that the mfg actually did something, but assuming what I had was not a bad batch, then somewhat older DVD burners might not like current Verbatim DVD-R media and I can't imagine they will release any more firmware updates for older drives at this point in time. but off the top of my head... you would think DVD media would not really change in the last decade or so since the technology has been mature for probably a good 10-15 years now.
  15. Honestly, I would not be surprised if the media has changed and your burner does not like them given my experience not long ago as I probably have a similar burner as you do. because I got a batch of Verbatim DVD-R 100-pack within the last year or two from Amazon and had to send it back due to so-so burn quality (while the small amount of burns I did were still technically readable(passed ImgBurn's 'verify'), besides one, KProbe scan showed burn quality was so-so compared to their usual standards) and I have the same type of discs (same media code and everything) I bought back in Jan 2014 and those still burn well on the same two burners I had a long time now (i.e. Liteon iHAS-324B(which I think I got in 2011 as I initially primary got this for XBox360 game burning))/Sony Optiarc 7240s(I had this since about 2009)). so I would assume something has changed, or maybe I happen to get a bad batch etc. but that experience was beneficial for me as now I got a rough idea how bad a KProbe scan has to be before outright read failure will occur on the disc (the one that failed to 'verify' on ImgBurn) since I scanned that particular disc. but I see the OP is trying to burn 'Windows'. the newest Windows 10 ISO's have not been small enough to fit on DVD media for years now so I just use a multi-boot USB stick to directly load ISO's. Windows 7 SP1 ISO will fit on a regular DVD but if you update that same Windows 7 ISO so it's got all updates as to about Jan 2023, it's too large to fit on a regular 4.7GB DVD. p.s. but once I got a refund and sent those back I found some new old stock of Verbatim 8x media (MCC 003) on Ebay and those burn pretty much as expected (there is some fluctuation in burn quality but it's still much closer to higher burn quality than low burn quality). EDIT: I just noticed the brand on the OP's is generic. so I would probably lean towards that being the problem. still, it's possible even going with brand name (Verbatim DVD-R etc), unless I got a bad batch, might not like that burner since it's probably similar enough to my iHAS324B. While that's probably generally okay if your burner likes your media, anything I care about I don't really take a chance and make sure it scans well with KProbe (basically similar to DiscSpeed) since that's a bit more accurate way to gauge burn quality. because if it's in the ball park of a higher quality burn, then it just buys you that much more time should the disc start to degrade over the years before the DVD burner/reader itself will fail to read the data on the disc. because if ones burn quality is so-so to begin with it will probably fail that much quicker. another semi-quick test one could probably do it get a rough indication of burn quality, assuming they don't want to use KProbe/DiscSpeed, is just copying the data back from the disc to the computer. like if it slows down during the copy, then that's a rough indication that at least that DVD burner/reader is at least slightly struggling to read it. because generally if a KProbe/DiscSpeed test shows it's got solid burn quality, chances are when you copy data from the disc back to hard drive it will read it with no slow down etc. so I guess it just depends on how important ones data is on how far they want to take things in this regard whether a simple burn/verify with ImgBurn is enough, or they want to take it a bit further with more details on KProbe/DiscSpeed etc.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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