Does anybody have TWO CD-Writers in their computer? And does anyone have Easy CD Creator on their machine? If so, does anyone know how to configure the software so that one can arbitrarily choose where to write the CD? I'm having trouble getting my new CDRW to work (40x), it keeps detecting and using my old 8x CDRW.
Posted by Yamashiro Den (Member # 510) on :
try using nero, it's pretty easy to set up for 2 burners.
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Two silly little questions, though:
1) Why not remove the old drive? 2) How are both drives connected (to which IDE bus, master/slave settings)?
Also, EasyCD sucks.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Only once you've used Nero. SONY's burning software, now that sucks.
Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :
Here's how my system is set up:
Primary Master: Removable Hard Drive (so I can switch between operating systems) Primary Slave: 8x4x32x CDRW Secondary Master: Hard drive (which kicks in if the Primary Master cannot be detected) Secondary Slave: 40x12x48 CDRW
The objective here is to use my older CDRW as a reader and thus an E drive and use the newer CDRW as the writer and thus the F drive. But it's not working. Any ideas?
The reason I use Easy CD is because it is able to analyze the files you are copying and sends a message if the paths of the files you are copying do not conform to the rules of the CDFS. This prevents useless CDs as if there are invalid paths, the CD won't work. No other software does this AFAIK, even Nero.
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
What version are you using? You should be given the choice at the time of writing as to the drive. If it's an older version, it might not know how to handle the new drive.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I always thought thought that you shouldn't have a CD-drive on the same IDE channel as your main hard drive, since hard drives nowadays tend to be IDE-66 or 100, and CD-ROMs only 33, and the IDE channel will only go as fast as the slowest drive on it.
Or is that crazy talk?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
IIRC, the IDE channel will only go as fast as the master drive.
Posted by Nimpim (Member # 205) on :
Why anyone would want to have two burners in the same computer is beyond me. The old one'll just read slow. New 52x CD-ROMs or corresponding DVD-ROMs are only about 20$ here in sweden, I think that would be safer.
Posted by Yamashiro Den (Member # 510) on :
with older cables, it is indeed true that the slowest drive dictates what the maximum speed is. that is no longer true. not that it really matters, though, since even fast 7200 RPM drives generally don't max out even ATA-33 except during rare peak transfers. have you tried just switching the drives? when it comes to just reading, it really doesn't matter whether a drive is set on the secondary or the primary channel.
Posted by Yamashiro Den (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tahna Los: the reason I use Easy CD is because it is able to analyze the files you are copying and sends a message if the paths of the files you are copying do not conform to the rules of the CDFS. This prevents useless CDs as if there are invalid paths, the CD won't work. No other software does this AFAIK, even Nero.[/QB]
i've never had a coaster with Nero (and i back up about 5 gig of data and copy dozens of cd's every month)that wasn't due to shitty media being burnt too fast, so i'm not sure if it's really an issue. in my experience Nero is a lot better than Roxio (though i like CloneCD the best).
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
quote:Primary Master: Removable Hard Drive (so I can switch between operating systems) Primary Slave: 8x4x32x CDRW Secondary Master: Hard drive (which kicks in if the Primary Master cannot be detected) Secondary Slave: 40x12x48 CDRW
Erh, that's a rather peculiar setup. Why not opt for a dual boot configuration? Allow me to make some changes...
P. Master: fixed harddrive P. Slave: old CDRW S. Master: new CDRW S. Slave: removable disk
Or swap the PS/SM around and assign 'm to F and E, respectively. You might have to mess around with drive letter distribution.
quote:I always thought thought that you shouldn't have a CD-drive on the same IDE channel as your main hard drive, since hard drives nowadays tend to be IDE-66 or 100, and CD-ROMs only 33, and the IDE channel will only go as fast as the slowest drive on it.
Those numbers represent the theoretical maximum transfer rates (in MB/s) the bus can handle, but only the best of the best of the best 7200rpm harddrives can get anywhere near them -- during bursts. Sustained data transmission is far slower, roughly around 20MB/s, so even an old ATA-33 interface can easily accomodate a device or two.
Of coure, if you plug in three or more drives on the same channel, *then* they start to suck up each other's bandwidth a bit.
Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :
Charles: ECDC version 5.0
Cartman: Can't do it. I have THREE separate operating systems (Win98, Win2000, Linux) to boot under and I'd like to keep them separate. If the hard drive goes kablooie, then the whole drive is lost. Better to lose one operating system than three. I want the secondary master to be there in the event that there are NO hard drives present in the Primary master.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Granted, the system isn't as fail-safe as yours, but historically the only reason for the setup was in order to retain compatibility with older games. To the actual point, I've tried copying CDs from the DVD drive to the CD burner, and its not entirely reliable. That combined with the fact that I rarely have to copy a CD to a CD straight, makes the actual utility of such a setup rather low.
Besides, ECDC comes with a CD copying program that can read a CD, cache its contents to a HD, and write to another, all from the same drive. Thats the easy solution, more reliable too.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
What two operating systems are you using?
And, on a slightly related note, has anyone using XP ever had to resort to their Win 98 (or whatever) OS to get something done?
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Yes. My scanner wouldn't work in anything above W98. Also, RA2 had the tendancy of surrendering me automatically. Mind you, this was when I had W2000 and W98. I then got XP, gave the scanner to my parents, but still needed W2000 to make CDs. Then I got Nero, and now I have just XP. Thankfully, all my other hardware works in XP. Haven't tried to see if the scanner will work in XP or not, what with XP's massive driver database...
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Well, in the early days (i.e. a little more than a year ago), I did have a fair number of programs and games that just died under Windows 2000, thus the dual booting to Windows 98. A quick looksee through the HD shows, Aliens vs.Predator 2, Dungeon Keeper 2, and Rogue Squadron. There were more, but as new drivers came out, patches, and the onset of gaming apathy...I haven't had to boot to w98 for at least a term.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)