Thanks alot alot! Is there no way to burn from separate harddrives? What I mean is burn two, three, etc. different iso's. I have 4 burners. Though I only use two. I would like to burn NOT MULTIPLE COPIES but, two separte data iso's simultaneously. Is that not possible without buffer underrun?
If you have ImgBurn (free) then open two windows and try to start to burns each with a different ISO. Try nero Burn Rom also in 2 different windows.
ive tried several instances of burning rom and decrypter. Havnt tried imgburn yet. But.. I would think it no different. But who knows. Ive noticed for the first 20-30sec of a burn, the drive wants Exclusive undivided access. It wont open even the most basic of programs when I first initiate the burn. DOESN'T matter which Harddrive im burning from. I wonder if 2GB of 6400 ram simply isnt enough for that kind of task.
No idea, have never been brave enough to try it. At the end of the day i have 15 hard drives on this pc now, so no hurry to burn anything, only problem i have is if i get lazy then there's too much to burn and it's like an uphill battle. Needless to say i only got lazy once
@omegaman7, You need Cincyrob or maybe Greensman to chime in. I know Cincyrob has done 4 different isos at the same time. I know he used several different burning programs but how he overcame the timing issues which you mentioned, i.e., exclusive access to the drives, I don't know.
I'll probably get one of these after the first of the year ~ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136155
@LOCO Too many digits left of the decimal. What do the blank BR discs cost now? All too rich for my blood. I guess bad burns would go the the good china set for coasters-ya know the ones for high tea.
ive read VERY good things about LG. Thats a decent price. I would touch blu-ray before vista. As long as its verbatim anyway. I imagine TY is only allowing the industry their BD's. Its only a matter of time. 15 HARDDRIVES! Creaky... I am Jealousy incarnate. I gather your running 64bit? That could be a thing too. Ive heard that 64bit operating runs 32bit seamlessly. And ive got 2.5 TB myself. Windows wont let me simultaneously run more than 2TB. Im aware of the 32bit limitation. As well as RAM. My next build is gonna be a TOTAL FREAK! I LOVE MY 1TB harddrive. Some say its nearly as fast as the VELOCIRAPTOR! Does your case hold that many HD'S? Mine only holds 6. But thats one on top of another. I WONT DO THAT.
You probably need a firmware upgrade. But thats a loaded question. I read that firmware upgrades are gonna be a necessity for BD drives. DONT own one myself, Just a guess.
@omegaman7 - i have no interest in 64-bit at home (i do use 64-bit at work, in the Unix world 64-bit has been the standard for longer than i can remember). I have 6 500GB SATA HDD's internal to an Antec 900, 3 ODD's (1 IDE and the others are SATA), the other HDD's are all in USB2.0 enclosures, 7 are 500GB and 2 smaller ones. Oh and 6 more ODD's in USB2.0 enclosures too. That's just the main PC
SO...You plug um in as you need um. Ahhh...I suppose that works. Myself, Sometimes I need to rip in a MAD MAD hurry. Multi drives come in handy. I can rip 5 dvds simultaneously and my processor appears to be doing darn near nothing when there's no compression. I figured it was because file transfers are nothing to it. Ive ripped 10dvds in under a half hour. More hardware and im sure I could top that though. Plus 3 of my opti's are getting old!
sure there is. 4 burners going at once...lol once i get my new mem in i will do it again and post the scans...lol
Here is a good question. If one drive fails during the burning process, are all discs coasters? Or do the others keep going and finish? I would think nero would have thought of that?
The few times that's happened to me, Nero just keeps burning the other copies.. of course paranoia kicks in and i'll admit to having CRC scanned the copies that didn't fail, just in case.. in my experience the remaining copies were fine, unless of course the failures were triggered by me messing with the pc (ie hard drive went ballistic) during the burn hence all copies would be wrecked.. edit- of course these days, with multi-core machines you can mess with the pc and the burns keep on truckin', you just gotta love multi-cores..
"edit- of course these days, with multi-core machines you can mess with the pc and the burns keep on truckin', you just gotta love multi-cores.." INDEED I do. I would love a quad core. My dual core athlon 5200 does a pretty good job though. NEXT, Its to the black phenom. I would never trust an intel! every system with one has seemed slower than what ive got. Though I havnt experienced either a dual or a quad intel. When single cores were a thing my 1.4 athlon did things quicker than the 2.0 and the 2.6 intels. Dont ask me how because I dont know. It just seemed more smooth. Less bottlenecking for sure.
I'm only going by what i've read but however there's very little in it between the two. ..i have a few E6400's as it happens, they're 2.13GHz; they're pretty quick but no way on earth are they a patch on my Q6600.... ..anyways, we're wandering off the topic of quality scans here ...