🚀 go-pugleaf

In <fHDLLbAQndD3EwPj@jasper.demon.co.uk>,
	Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> No, I don't think so.  I have an IDE rewriter in a spare machine and
> that's exactly what I do.  I write at 1x - I have plenty of time, after
> all, and I suspect it might produce a more reliable copy.

If you were running on a machine that couldn't cope with a faster writer then
a slow writer would be more reliable, but with digital recording which is
what a CD is, as long as the components can physically cope, the copies
should be exact.
 
> This willy-waving about SCSI and being able to record at 4x or 8x is
> IMHO,  just the k3Wl d00Dz running off hundreds of pirate copies of the
> latest m3g4-RAd game for their mates.
> 
> <fx: dons asbestos underwear & legs it>

Never mind the asbestos underwear, in the light of recent events, labelling
a number of people as software pirates in a newsgroup seems rather
dangerous.

Personally I bought a good SCSI writer because I could afford one, and
didn't fancy the bad stories I'd heard about IDE ones. Given that I had
SCSI already (I've got a 36x SCSI CDROM as well as a 12x in my other PC,
the latter was a transfer from this one, which only has SCSI, the former
because my 12x SCSI was faster than many 32x IDEs I've used), the extra
cost has been outweighed by the fact that I can do backups while I do other
things, without having to waste a machine purely as a writer.

I think you owe a lot of people in here an apology.

Paul