Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:50:31 +0200 From: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@portaone.com> Cc: sos@freebsd.org Subject: Re: burncd(8) usability: why `-s max' isn't default? Message-ID: <xzpn00btwco.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <4134530C.6020309@portaone.com> (Maxim Sobolev's message of "Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:29:32 %2B0300") References: <4133683A.3090201@portaone.com> <xzppt578zww.fsf@dwp.des.no> <4134530C.6020309@portaone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@portaone.com> writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > > Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@portaone.com> writes: > > > I wonder if there are any compelling reasons why `-s max' is not > > > default behaviour of burncd(8). IMHO, there is no point to have > > > default of 4. Usually, today's drives are smart enough to select the > > > maximum speed supported both by drive and by the medium. > > Plenty of drives aren't, especially with cheap media. > Do you have any evidence? Yes. My laptop's DVD/CD-RW drive (Hitachi something-or-other) turns out coasters if I try to use -s max with no-brand CD-R media. > You will have big problems finding any CD-R media (even very > cheap one) with rating < 32 on the market today, so that chances to > "overspeed" the media with those ancient burners are quite theoretical. What planet do you live on? Back here on Earth, the most widely available CD-R media is 16x or 24x, and prices rise steeply once you cross that boundary. For CD-RW media, that boundary is even lower (8x or 12x). DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpn00btwco.fsf>