DirectCD Version Compatible with Windows XP Pro

[CousinJoe]

I was using DirectCD version 3.05. I upgraded to XP and it was crying like crazy. Is there anyway I can upgrade to a version compatible with XP? I do not have Easy CD Creator with it, just DirectCD.

[Inertia]

DirectCD 3.05 is obsolete and does not support WinXP. If you prefer DirectCD to other packet writing programs, it is not sold or upgraded separately from the full packaged software product.

In order to support WinXP with a legal copy of DirectCD v5.xxx, recent versions of Easy CD Creator (v5 or later) or WinOnCD (v3.8 PE or later) are required.

[CousinJoe]

Thanks. Do you have a recommendation for a different program to replace it with. The main reason I liked DirectCD was it's ability to basically make a CD-R function as a CD-RW. I couldn't really find any others that I liked. Easy CD Creator is a little pricey though, so if you have any other suggestions let me know.

[CDRecorder]

I think I saw an Easy CD Creator "starter kit" at Target a while back that had the basic version of ECDC (as opposed to platinum) for a lot cheaper than the platinum version. Also, a new drive with ECDC basic probably costs less than ECDC platinum alone.

[Inertia]

You could download the Easy CD Creator 5 Preview Edition Trial Version Download and see if the latest DirectCD meets your expectations and requirements.

[vbl117]

Thanks. Do you have a recommendation for a different program to replace it with. The main reason I liked DirectCD was it's ability to basically make a CD-R function as a CD-RW. I couldn't really find any others that I liked. Easy CD Creator is a little pricey though, so if you have any other suggestions let me know.

No CD-R can function like a CD-RW . I assume you want to say it is able to record multiple data session on a CD-R ( multisession ) . Nero and many other software can do it too .

But Direct CD is a packet writing software . I know only In CD ( bundled with Nero it seems to me ) as other packet writing software .

[cfitz]

No CD-R can function like a CD-RW.

Not in terms of being erasable, no. But DirectCD, unlike InCD, can packet write to CD-R media as well as CD-RW. This is a nice feature, because CD-R tends to be more reliable than CD-RW.

cfitz

[dodecahedron]

true.
but a major aspect of the appeal of packet-writing, is the ability to erase files too - just like a real floppy. when packet writing to a CDR you can only write.

so i can't see the appeal of packet-writing to CDR. might as well use multisessions. and that's more reliable anyway...

[cfitz]

I don't know for sure since I don't have DirectCD, but I suspect there is a good chance you can 'erase' files on CD-R with it the same way you can 'erase' files on a multi-session ISO 9660 disc: the files are marked as 'erased' so you can't see them anymore. Of course the actual physical space can’t be reclaimed.

Another potential appeal of packet writing to CD-R is its ability to write small files with relatively low overhead. There is a lot of overhead associated with multi-session CD's. Every time you write a session you use up roughly 13-15 MiBytes of to write the lead-in and lead-out of the new session. Also, you can write a maximum of only 99 sessions on a multi-session ISO 9660 disc. So you can see that you will quickly run out of resources if you intend to write many small files one at a time using multi-session recording.

And, of course, you must not forget the drag-and-drop convenience of packet writing. Going the multi-session route is not nearly as convenient when all you want to do is save a ~10 KiByte file. You have to start up your favorite burning program, import the previous sessions on the disc, hit the 'burn' button, and then wait while the ~14 MiBytes of lead-in and lead-out are written to accommodate your ~10 KiByte file.

All of these issues make packet writing appealing, compared to multi-session ISO 9660 burning, when you want to store many small files one at a time.

cfitz

[Inertia]

Exactly right, cfitz (as usual). Packet written CD-R disks can be erased as you noted by removing their access although they remain on the disk.

There is no reason to suppose that multisession is more reliable than packet writing with a CD-R. In my opinion, the packet writing unreliability problem is essentially a CD-RW disk reliability problem, not the UDF file system used for packet writing (used on DVD's as well).

Multisession writing has its own potential reliability problems. See When should multisession recording be used?.

Not even 99 sessions are available for multisession recording in the real world. The high overhead of this method uses up all available space before the theoretical 99 sessions can be used.

For instance, consider an 80 minute CDR:

The 702 MB capacity is for a 80 minute data disk written in the ISO 9660 format.

Packet writing on CD-RW disks is sometimes thought to have high overhead, but if you write more than seven sessions, packet writing is increasingly more efficient than multisession. On a 80 minute packet written CD-RW disk, about 571 MB of user space is always available regardless of the number of sessions. Using a CD-R disk, about 664 MB of user space is always available.

ISO multisession recording has very high overhead. Lead-in and lead-out for the first session uses about 22 MB and 13 MB for each subsequent session.

So if you want to write a lot of sessions, say 20, it would consume 269 MB of overhead and leave about 434 MB for user information (80 minute disk).

30 sessions would take 399 MB for overhead, leaving 304 MB for user information.

With multisession, the more sessions that you write, the less user space is available. Using an 80 minute CDR, you could write 52 sessions before you ran out of space. Unfortunately, the whole disk would be used for overhead, with no space available for user data.

Not too appealing, is it.

[dodecahedron]

thanks cfitz and Inertia for clarifying this issue.
(i am well aware of all these details but didn't have the energy to write a detailed and length post...luckily others filled in on my shortcoming...)

[Inertia]

..(i am well aware of all these details but didn't have the energy to write a detailed and length post...luckily others filled in on my shortcoming...)

I don't have the energy either.

That's why I copied a reply that I had saved to use when this topic comes up every once in awhile. That's why the answer was somewhat pedantic and redundant, because I didn't have the energy to rewrite it.

I started saving some of my replies to posts when I was contributing to the CD-ROM Guide CD-RW forum. I had over 3700 posts there (sorry hoxlund), but they had an infuriating habit of deleting posts fairly quickly so that you couldn't be sure to be able to link to a prior answer. I fixed that by just copying my usable replies to a text file and copying and pasting when the same topic came up.

Still comes in handy at times.

[dodecahedron]

I don't have the energy either.

That's why I copied a reply that I had saved to use when this topic comes up every once in awhile. That's why the answer was somewhat pedantic and redundant, because I didn't have the energy to rewrite it.

LOL
i do the same.
but since i am a lesser CD guru than you, here is the extent of my "saved" replies for multiple posting:

check out the FAQ:
How to enable DMA in Windows XP (with pictures)
Problems enabling DMA in Windows XP

What are DMA and UDMA ? especially the links at the last post.

... when I was contributing to the CD-ROM Guide CD-RW forum. I had over 3700 posts there (sorry hoxlund)

LOL