On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 22:04:56 -0500 "Leon A. Goldstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ronnie Gauthier wrote: > > > I know lots of the problems with IDE burning is the CD and HD > > being on the same ribbon, as well as in direct CD2CD with the > > CDburner and CDreader on the same ribbon. > > > > That is the problem with IDE burners. For on-the-fly burning at > high speed the CDROM and CD-RW must be on separate IDE channels. > If slaving a CD-RW to a hard drive is not acceptable, then the CDROM > should be slaved to the CD-RW. > If you look at computers on sale in the various emporia, the CD-RW > is the "boot" or master CDROM. > In theory, Burn-Proof allows on-the-fly burning with the CDROM as > master, and the CD-RW as slave, on the secondary IDE channel. > > As pointed out previously, SCSI burners avoid this IDE channel > congestion. >
Nobody with even a room-temperature IQ would ever claim that IDE is better than SCSI, but there are millions of PCs with IDE disks and IDE burners that work just fine if you avoid the obvious restrictions. I've never had SCSI anything and I've had quite good results (even on my old K6II-300 machine with a lamebrain HP burner (only at speed=2). (A side note, HP sells burners, but they don't put that POS in the PCs they sell!) Anyway, the only reason I replied is to p---off the prima donas who only speak SCSI. -- Collins Richey - Denver Area Redhat 7.3 system _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
