You are not logged in. Please login or register.
DriverPacks.net Forum » Posts by Helmi
552 Transfer aborted. Disk quota exceeded.
So much for that :\
Well, I'll have to see what can get cleaned up then.
Or Bâshrat the Sneaky could extend the quota if there's still some HDD space left 
Helmi wrote:mr_smartepants wrote:I know for a fact that you get better burn quality at lower burn speeds. If you're not in a hurry, always burn at the slowest possible speeds.
Modern media that is veryfied for 16x writing ususally works best at exactly that speed.
Burning them slower (either because the device can't do it faster or out of purpose) can actually get you worse results than burning on the certified speed.
Strange, but nonetheless true...OK, I'm going to have to disagree with you there...
Well, ok, but I guess it's not so much a metter of opinions but rather of different HW constellations
Also, this wasn't my first-hand experience but rather something I read in a reputaded PC tech magazine.
I proved this to myself about a year ago with my new 16x Plextor ($$$) burner. I bought about 4 different brands of 16x media and tried burning the same DVD at different speeds to try to pick out the most compatible media for my burner. I burnt at 16x, 12x, 8x, 4x for all brands and I found that on my DVD player, the 16x burned media would only play the first 5 min of the movie then stall. The 12x burned movie was better but stalled out halfway through. The 8x burned movies played all the way through but didn't last that long (10 playbacks max) and the 4x burned movies are still going strong.
YMMV.
It definately depends on what brands of media used on what device model.
Unfortunately, you cannot give a universal advise as to what medium is the best or what burner is.
So for, I seem to run fine with Verbatim DVD+R 16x media on my new LG, however, they wouldn't work in the older Sony.
The previous 8x DVD+Rs I used (same company, same brand, same look just different speed) worked perfectly in the Sony (with 4x speed, mind you, because it couldn't do faster), however, the 16x (couldn't get the 8x anymore, and 4x have long been gone!) gave me horrible results.
I have yet to try burning the 16x at both 18x (which my new device is capable of and shows these blanks are, too...) or a lower-than-given speed.
It's a YMMV story, indeed, and even your own results can vary between your own results... *grrr*
Using the latest firmware certainly helps a lot, but my old Sony had no newer one to be found.
It's four years old by now, but still going strong apart from that.
A shame really, that you have to replace HW just because of that.
Well, at least now my testing bed PC got a DVD drive so I can finally leave the CDs behind
Better post such issues in the apropriate sub-forum (that is the one for the DP in question).
They'll definately get spotted better in that place.
Oh, and also try making the thread title a bit more descriptive.
It's nice that you tell what device and what OS, but try adding some tag such as [MISSING FILES?] or [BUG?] (which question marks if you aren't sure) makes it much easier to handle
For now, I'll move ya over to DriverPack LAN! 
Why aren't you guys uploading to the FTP I'm providing? :S Am I missing something?
Not you are missing something but he is.
Care to give a link to where I upload?
A nice little sticky that is!
Here you are:
http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=329
Try paying some attention to those useful stickies next time, will ya?
the rewritable media are not as reliable as WORM media. That is not unusual.
Never put backups or info you wish to store for long periods on rewritable.
While I personally have made only good experiences with anything but ultra-low-priced cheapo RWs (why you would want to get these is a mystery anyway because, seeing as they are reusable, you may just get some more expensive ones...), this probabaly holds true.
Still, yet, this should not trick you into believing your data is save on a WORM medium.
Quite the contrary, I have had a lot of older CD-Rs dissolve over time although they are stored dry and away from light (maybe not that cool though, but I don't have any free space in the refridgerator! 
).
If you want to do backups, I can only STRONGLY advice using either opto-magnetical media, tapes or DVD-RAMs.
Using ordinary CDs/DVDs is just asking for trouble, IMO.
HDDs aren't much better.
Even if the data is still well-preserved, seeing as the controller is "on-board", if that one is to fail, your data is gone as well (unless you pay a restore company big bucks for retaining it...).
True.
Last week I lost my first CDRW to dye breakdown. Granted, the disc was about 5 years old.
Any idea on the re-write cycles it had to sustain so far?
Just curious.
Personally, I'd consider 5 years a well-paid-off lifetime for such a media, moreso seeing as they don't cost that much more than a WORM edition
I have a half-dozen DVD-R/W discs that I use for testing. I don't keep anything important on them.
Me neither, but in any case, if you use NERO, make sure to use its Verify Disc After Burning feature, very, very handy!
For archival purposes, I use DVD-R (I hear that +R is better for longevity).
Dunno, but I'm using DVD+R out of principle (-Rs have already burnt-in crippled CSS sectors whereas +Rs haven't, if you own a special burner (very expensive!), you could copy CSS protected media, as the CSS sectors are writable )
I know for a fact that you get better burn quality at lower burn speeds. If you're not in a hurry, always burn at the slowest possible speeds.
Generally, you would think so, unfortunately, this does not always hold ture.
Modern media that is veryfied for 16x writing ususally works best at exactly that speed.
Burning them slower (either because the device can't do it faster or out of purpose) can actually get you worse results than burning on the certified speed.
Strange, but nonetheless true...
rewriteables use a more malleable metalic surface and it is suseptable to deforming or not holding the imprint as well or for as long.
Actually, going a bit technical here, RWs use the fact that metals can either take a crystal or an amorph shape.
The crystal will reflect the light in a given angle (just as a mirror), whereas in the amorph shape the light reflection will be diffuse, not reflecting the light into a given direction but rather all.
This state can be changed simply by heating the metal to somewhere close to the melting point, then cooling it down either quickly or slowly.
Generally, this process is infinitively reversible, however, obviously heating will accelerate any oxidation of the metal or other reactions.
I'm not too keen on how exactly this works in an RW medium, but that is the principle at least
This characteristic must exist in order to make it eraseable.
It also makes it harder to get a good write and less likely to hold for long periods.
Indeed, the writing method differs quite a lot from the ordinary WORM media.
Also, as you may have noticed, some standalone CDDA players will have problems properly reading a CDDA-RW, whereas a CDDA-R will work flawlessley.
This is also based on the different writing technique and the resulting less-than-perfect readability (not so good contrast between the pits and lands).
the surface tends to flatten itself over time especialy if not kept cool.
Not sure about that, I would rather suspect that a higher temperature could mean the metal recrystalizes itself (I'm pretty sure it won't re-amorph, though ), and be it due to auto-dispersion.
Ever microwave a cd for a couple of seconds? - [not good for the microwave, but fun to watch]
Oh yes, especially for the kids!
Why you not packing at best quality like Ultra/LZMA/128/273/solid MEMuse 1375MB/130MB ???
Why, yes, you should!
I've always pointed this out when someone asked about it and I'm pretty sure it's even in the guidelines.
ALWAYS go for max, space is limited on both CDs as well as even on DVDs.
Why you not use SOLID?!?!
Good question, I know that I am using it all the time, as it doesn't add much compression/decompression time (CPU usage) but gains you A LOT.
Depending on the situation, it can even be more efficient than using a larger dictionary (which can really make compressing a very long thing if the memory needed exceeds your RAM - always go for the suggested (default) value or at least the one that still fits your RAM unless you want to wait HOURS for compressing.
Oh, you can drop any DP you do not need, even official ones.
You can, for instance, only include the DPMS, so you can find the drives to install on in TM, then install all the other drivers manually (if required).
You can even remove single devices from one DP, then repack it.
Does the 3rd Party DP host no longer work or why Rapidshare?
Their speed is ususall good, but you can merely DL one file at a time and have to wait hours before you can start your next DL 
Also, this isn't so much a modification but an update to the packs, if I read that correctly.
Hence, we can replace the old files with this one, as no files were dropped but some got added, making these packs the better ones to use, right?
If so, please upload on the proper host (if that works, else complain here so I can check with Bâshrat the Sneaky about it), then I will update the entries in the sticky!
The problem is probabaly that it's not just ordinary drivers (you know, INFs, SYSs, INIs etc) but a real installation routine.
Take for example my DVD-RAM "drivers" that cannot be bound in using the BASE, either (ok, I could run them as an exception).
Also, if you only install the drivers, what do you gain by this?
It would lack the "free mouse" (movinjg directly from the host GUI to the guest one) as well as drag&drop of files.
Personally, that is what counts, not whether I have sound or more than 16 colours
Maybe locked, deleted or moved to a forum where you do not have access to.
Contact an admin over at MSFN for further assistance.
That, or the link just got mistyped and doesn't even exist...
*bump*
Updated HP drivers pack on front page.
I've 7zipped the pack to version 7.04.29. Updated post @ top of this page.
Great, I updated the entry in the stick thread:
http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic. … 3783#p3783
Please, be so kind and provide some MD5 hash for completion's sake
I have tested the 7.04 on sevral laptop's and PC's with great succsess.
But yesterday I tried in on a Toshiba Satellite A100-570 , with a ATI RADEON XPRESS 200M IGP , and it faild instaling the graphic driver.(Could not find driver)Is this driver included in one of the three graphics driverPack 's. ?
I'm not sure, I think it should be in A... (member of the Drivers Team please comment on this)
http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/xp/i … ed-xp.html
This is the link to the driver, however, its name differs from the "ordinary" catalyst ones.
It's quite possible ATi have split them recently, because I remember the XPRESS drivers were part of the Cat suite.
Sorry I did not have time to collect any of the log files, apart from DPs_BASE.ini &DPs_BASE.log.
All the other driver's on the Toshiba instaled fine
That's a pity, because the Finisher log is actually the most interesting in such cases because it tells you whether the device has actually been detected and why no drivers have been installed for it.
I have often wondered about telecharger.
FYI:
Télecharger is French and simply means "to download".
Télechargement meas "the downloading".
Literally it means "remote loading".
Just in case you weren't aware
Then post a request in the proper section so you have at least a chance it will be included in the next version.
We are very specific about how to request and where, because otherwise no one will be able to keep track of all these driver versions.
See the already existing [REQ] posts for how to do this.
Firstly, what's KDE?
You are by chance referring to KTD...
Secondly, You WILL NEED to reboot after the installation has finished to properly clean up all remaining files.
I can definately verify that this works absolutely fine on every installation I have done so far with the current version of BASE.
Great that's sorted out, heh
Solid Archive is useful all the time unless you plan to extract only specific files from the archive (ie when you work with them manually and save a picture collection or such).
If you use SA and extract a single file, it will have to extract the whole archive to retrieve this file, this can take a while on a large one and also consumes more memory.
Since the BASE works with the whole archives anyway (no selective extractions) we can completely ignore this only downside (ok, maybe it also prevents a successfull restoration of the archive should it get corrupted, but in our case that means we can forget the whole archive anyway) and live with the big size reduction.
Especially so since there are a lot of files of the same type (eg, INI, SYS, INF).
BTW: 4.45beta is the latest z-Zip version (as of yesterday).
Some speed improvements are what the changelog tells...
Is it me, or is Microsoft's patch testing almost non existent.
One seriously has to wonder what the use of this "Patch Day" is when it neither helps in providing security fixes the day after the holes have been revealed (in the worst case you'll have to wait another month to get it fixed!) nor provide stable, final patches that underwent excessive testing...
p.s. I like your politically correct "hiccup" rather than my more abrupt "screwup"
Dang!
All that while I was trying to appear PC and more honest and open-minded!
now all the idiots are using it, lol.
That sums it up nicely
[...] one day you gonna open your eyes and realise that xp population seemed to suddenly jumped from 80% to 5% and vista jumped from 20% to 95%
Doubtful.
Sales aren't going as well as MS predicted (then again, thise marketeers are always way too optimistic) and if it's not for buying a whole new system that already comes with Vista preinstalled, there's hardly anyone switching just because, IMO.
Xp is old news now, it is being used less and less everyday, in 2009 ( which is just around the corner ) windows vienna will be out, xp will be even more usseless then, so in my opinnion, waisting time making driverpacks for an operating system that is seriously VERY FAST on it's way out does not make sense ....
Now, isn't that a contradiction in itself?
If Vienna is about to come that soon (and yes, I have read that elsewhere in numerous places, so it's probabaly true), there's even less reason to switch to Vista.
Stick to XP until Vienna is there, then jump over, skipping Vista altogether.
Makes more sense to me at least.
maybe it is time to start working on a vista framework ? i would be happy to help with driver collections and anything else ....
Now, I'm not speaking out all against Vista here, but frankly, anyone using his OS in a rather professional sense gains exactly what through Vista that isn't for the most part offered by XP already?
I'm sure, it's neither Aero Glass nor DX10...
Yes, there are a couple of nice new features, but does that make you switch from a good-working OS that you already know very well, has a large user base and lot of resources to be found about on the net to something rather new when it does not offer a big advantage?
Seems rather foolish to do so right now.
Just my €0.02...
Maybe it's another WGA hiccup...
Try installing the other two updates if they need be (for instance, the MRT is only needed when you cannot use any other (often better) software for the task.
Just decline the EULA for WGA and it won't install and not nag you about not being installed.
@helmi
Maybe we could get all these together in a topic?
Unfortunately, I cannot merge threads/posts on this forum (not supported by software).
You can create a HOWTO, though, and I'd be glad to stick it
(or maybe Bâshrat the Sneaky can do something with his Admin powers...)
Realtek, I presume.
I edited the title to better show this
You know, RTL isn't the only one who makes HDA hardware
(yes, I know, hard to belive, but still ture!)
I edited the thread title to better reflect this is a helpig thread for users with the problem and not let it seem as if you are seeking for help with this
P.S.
Someone has to enlighten me on the inner workings of 7zip files.... I removed and re-added the same amount of data... however the resulting file was more that double the size... even on Max settings.
Format: 7z
Compression Level: Ultra
Compression Method: LZMA
Dictionary Size: 128MB
Word Size: 273Whats the deal?
Did you chose solid archive?
Also, if it was packed on a system with lots of RAM, the dict. size may have been higher than yours, which, theoretically, could result in a smaller file, but ususally only when the files packed exceed that size.
I've never done this re-adding within an archive before, I always fully extracted them then completely re-packed, so I don't know for sure.
Which version are you using anyway?
Maybe this is a bug of some sorts, best is to check with the peeps over at www.7-zip.org
DriverPacks.net Forum » Posts by Helmi
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
[ Generated in 0.052 seconds, 5 queries executed ]