If I dare jump in, I'd phrase it the other way around. The source media is the authoritative copy; hacks and cracks are the compromises.
On 20 April 2012 13:48, Aleš Keprt <a...@keprt.cz> wrote: > Yes, but these compromises are needed for 1 disk of 100, while 99 of > 100 do work with DSK. So if somebody sends us his new ETracker tune in EDSK > format I ask myself: "Is this really what we needed?" > > Btw. I haven't seen SAMdisk utility before. It looks nice. I slept many > years or something. [image: Mrkající veselý oblicej] Please can you tell > me the format of TRD (Beta128 TRDOS images)? Is it the same as DSK? Or is > it like SAD without header? I read the documentation you link from your > website, so I know the internal data format, but I can't see the actual TRD > file format described there. Thanks in advance. > > Aley > > *From:* Simon Owen <simon.o...@simcoupe.org> > *Sent:* Friday, April 20, 2012 10:40 PM > *To:* sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no > *Subject:* Re: Musics > > Aley, > > I'd started to type a longer reply to this, but I just can't be bothered > anymore. It's clear we have very different approaches to pretty much > everything. I'm just not willing to make the same compromises as you when > it comes to preserving media. If it doesn't work without modifying it, you > need a better quality copy. > > Si > > > On 20 Apr 2012, at 20:07, Aleš Keprt wrote: > > You know my disk extractor and other utilitie are dated 199x. > > And I don't like this. I think 95% or even more of disks overall don't > need any special disk formats, and there are many software utilities which > support simple DSK/MGT/SAD because those programs are much older than 2005. > It isn't a clever idea to design a whole new file format 15 years after Sam > Coupe was born and use it for all disks even when it is not needed for most > of them. Also those two SDF files can be downloaded from some websites, but > I haven't seen any protected EDSK files anywhere, so I would prefer > sticking with the same formats. "Don't change what works." Also this is the > first time I have seen EDSK file on my own eyes, and I wonder why it has > DSK extension when it is not a real old good DSK file. I looked at the file > in heax view and I can see Amstrad CPC header in it. Note that I created my > SAD format only because it was years before DSK format was known to me, and > also I have several 840KB disks which are a bit problematic in DSK > especially in some software which automatically expect 800KB DSK only. But > otherwise DSK is enough for most of disks. > > I think it would be OK if we had this file format around 1995 when there > was a real big need to backup our disks, but not in 2005 when 99% of disks > are converted and possibly cracked to be converted without any special file > formats. > > Aley > > *From:* Simon Owen <simon.o...@simcoupe.org> > *Sent:* Friday, April 20, 2012 7:36 PM > *To:* sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no > *Subject:* Re: Musics > > On 20 Apr 2012, at 17:25, Aleš Keprt wrote: > > I'd like to know why do you use Amstrad CPC file format, instead of a > standard Sam Coupe one (DSK/MGT or SAD). > > > EDSK has been an adopted format in the SAM scene at least as far back as > 2005. It's the only way to preserve some disks in their original format, > allowing for unformatted tracks, disk errors and other custom-formatting > tricks. EDSK seemed like a reasonable solution at the time, without > inventing yet another disk image file format. > > Before that was finalised I did still create SDF as a temporary solution. > Only two public disk images ever existed (Lemmings and Prince of Persia), > and I don't think the creation tool was every released. All support for > SDF was dropped from SimCoupe a few months back, so it's effectively dead
