Found this link today while doing some researchin' on the web. Nice article and well written. This one's for you FutureProof...

http://www4.tomshardware.com/storage...617/index.html

Shoebedobedoo

Blah, it's just an article built of pieces found
here and there which contains plenty of
technical errors (like every time a journalist
pretends to be an engineer).

Spath's got it just right. Even one of the test result is wrong. Test 2 should have been copied succesfully with the LTR 24102B - even without AWS with CloneCD.

Hmmm... It says that the Plextor supports correct "EMF" encoding. That's a new one.

This is both untrue and plagarised.

Why ya'll so freakin' criticle around here? Can't you see the dude is using ClonyXXL suggessted settings? Don't blame him, blame the makers of ClonyXXL for improper suggested read and write options. If you own a copy of C&C Renegade and scan with ClonyXXL, prog will tell you to check "regenerate data sectors", which isn't needed. Plextor DOES support EFM encoding, but does NOT write regular bit patterns correctly, but rather "almost correctly".

Shoebedobedoo

Please tell me 1 CDRW that can copy Safedisc 2.51.021 that writes regurlar bit patters almost correctly? You won't find one around. Notice the CDRW'S listed that can make "perfect" 1:1 copies of SD 2.51.021, all of them wtite regular bit patterns correctly, NOT almost correctly. Refer to the CloneCD help launcher, then supported drives.

Shoebedobedoo

When did I say there was one?

I was pointing out the term "EMF".

So will CloneCD. It's like reading subchannels with SD2. It can't hurt, but can help, so why not?

Remember, the profiles were designed for people who aren't too knowledgable about this sort of thing.

No-one here is critical just correct. I suggest you search on spath's posts (or blackcheck or alexnoe or truman), read each one twice, then learn something and be prepared to offer demonstrably knowledgeable information in this particular Forum. A little knowledge is dangerous and you are extremely so.

No-one here is critical just correct. I suggest you search on spath's posts (or blackcheck or alexnoe or truman), read each one twice, then learn something and be prepared to offer demonstrably knowledgeable information in this particular Forum. A little knowledge is dangerous and you are extremely so.

I need NOT search spath's post or blackcheck or alexnoe or truman. What you need to do FutureProof is get off my back!(get off my back!). There, you read that 2 times. A few people managed to make a "perfect" 1:1 copy of C&C Renegade with Plextor PX-W2410a and I"M ONE of them. Not ALL Plextor PX-W 2410a models can. I know what I'm talking about, and need not research your (FutureProof) suggested threads..........

Shoebedobedoo

Hmm...inaccurate, technically crippled, poor knowledge of copy protection, more EFM encoding crap myths (all writers have to perform EFM encoding anyway); not impressed at all.

All writers have to perform EFM encoding? This ISN'T true whatsoever FutureProof. Shows us all just how much you really know. I'm aware of at least 1 writer that can copy protections that doesn't support EFM encoding writing regular bit patters "almost" correctly or correctly.

Shoebedobedoo

You need to be really careful about what you say. There is an EFM Lookup Table on every writers chipset. Data written to disc is modulated by converting 8 bits to 14 bits and then adding 3 merge bits which Professor Kuhn describes as "sort of eight to seventeen modulation". DVD encoding performs eight to sixteen modulation (ESM)

Eight to fourteen modulation (EFM) is the basis of error correction on all coloured book standard discs. Do you think I'm so stupid as to post nonsense? If you read the references you so dutifully found, you'd know what we're talking about.

The problem is one of writing - "correct EFM encoding of regular bit patterns". This is a two part statement. The EFM encoder has to write regular bit patterns. A regular bit pattern fed into the EFM encoder can cause large values of the digital sum value in case the merging bits cannot reduce this value (Annex B to ECMA-130). The EFM Table is at Annex D.

I don't claim any technical expertise but I do know that reports on the ability of various plex writers to handle sd 2.5xx vary wildly even with respect to identical models. Reports with respect to identical models using the same firmware sometimes indicate that the users can make working back-ups without AWS, some indicate that back-ups made with AWS work but those made without AWS don't, and some can't get a working back-up at all.

I don't doubt that spath could provide the technical reason for this, though I wouldn't understand the explanation . From my limited understanding, however, it is because plexes handle the reading/writing in a non-standard way (probably why they defeat protected audio with such ease).

i was going to make a big compilation of all the technically incorrect remarks shoe has made in this thread, but then i read this one.

also, from the well written article by tom (i kinda despise his site)

"Regular bit patterns go through the EFM Encoder and are converted to a smaller value by converting bits to bytes (8 bit = 1 byte) in a pre-determined way"

he has his conversions right, 8 bits = 1 byte. but to say that a smaller value comes out because of this is rather amusing. also, you can get a smaller value from the simple conversion of 10 dimes = 1 dollar, if you are so inclined.

plagurists should be rounded up and shot. this world needs more original thought, and less people claiming other peoples original thoughts as their own........sorry about my little diatribe, i was on a roll in my head.

@ FutureProof

>> "Hmm...inaccurate, technically crippled, poor knowledge of copy protection"

Huch! Time to prove your own knowledge, with a simple question and a quite easy answer : what does mean "Tagès"?

And as we are speaking about knowledge, pay a look to http://www.brennmeister.com/forum/vi...24&forum=6&474

of cours, it's in german...

Yo cskin, get a life dude! I double dare ya to even try to attempt to make a web-site about copy protections and let's just see how well you do. This forum literally s*cks!!!!!! I hate critical, judgemental, ignorant people like those here at club cd-freaks!!!!

Hmmm.. You're the one being critical and judgemental, by saying the forum sucks and telling people to get a life.

How are the people here ignorant? Everything written here has been true except for the things you have said.

Where is this ignorance of which you speak? Why are you so angry.

No surprises here, maybe less than you!

If you feel this way, why participate?

David (not Sir),
You must be blind and ignorant dude! READ the first REPLY post on this thread man! There is where the bashing begins. All I did was post a link and all of you bashed the website! Maybe some "particular" Australians around here need to be shot!

Shoebedobedoo


BTW, I'm sure glad FutureProof told me there were Plexy engineers who are registered at this forum. In the future, I REFUSE to purchase another Plextor drive.

spath was just saying there were technical inaccuracies in what's supposed to be a technical document. This is completely true. This "bashing" is called for. As is pointing out that EFM en/decoders are present in all drives.

You cannot be mad at people for pointing out things which are true.

Everyone take a deep breath and back off. PM warnings have been sent, heed the advice or the thread goes south

for once, im not going to flame in return. *applauds* futureproof for regulating.

and as for making a website about copy protections, i couldnt do it, as i'd have to credit way too many sources that i read here on the internet. tom should have too, but he, as usual, stole the info. the entire page should be a big a** link to cdfreaks