| |
swasti
Registered: Jul 2007
Posts: 118 |
THE MOVERS Treasure Chest II
hello dudes,
fresh from my red hot glowing 1541-ii disk drive - another transferpack (finished some minutes ago..). i got the disks from a friend with his c64.
246 transfered disk sides in the pack.
that was a bloody work - some (bad) hd disks and pc disks where in the box. some of them makes my drive crazy.
HOT!!
if you have self transfered disk - please post them! ;)
regards
swasti |
|
... 264 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
elkmoose
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 45 |
i dont, i dont trust nibtools...
i am not convinced it really knows the difference between a readerror and a copyprotection. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 |
nibtools sound like the wrong tool for the job to me somewhat. its designed to get an accurate image of a disk *including* errors. for most transfer jobs (ie, unless you are doing originals) you probably want something that is designed to read the disk error free no matter what. |
| |
swasti
Registered: Jul 2007
Posts: 118 |
i use nibread because i get faster speeds for transfering.
speed is about 10 secs per 35track disk (warpcopy = 22 sec)
and - i can do it in my living room - without the need of a full c64 setup (that i can only do in my hobby room in the cellar)
if u have some 100 or 1000 disks todo - every second you save during transfer is good.
@tmb: pls send me and mdz your disks done with sc and with nibread - to see the difference (errors) or post them here.
sure - the result should be "best possible". not that i waste my time and the transfered disks are crap. if i can choose between disktransfering and f*****g ... dont ask what i like more ;) so - every second i have more for my family is more fun..hehe
nibread yes/no ?
swasti |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 |
Quote:i use nibread because i get faster speeds for transfering. speed is about 10 secs per 35track disk (warpcopy = 22 sec)
what about starcommander? it should get close to 8 seconds with parallel cable :) |
| |
swasti
Registered: Jul 2007
Posts: 118 |
you need pure dos for this. nibread works under winxp.
i think i´ll make a dos boot cd that can write to ntfs partitions.
someone had one? |
| |
sailor
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 90 |
Hello all, a few thoughts on the way...
I run a 1541-II with paracable, best speed i have gotten with SC is somewhere around 20-25 sec.. dont ask me why :)
Nibread actually boosts down to 10 seconds, i rushed the thing a bit, just for kicks, it took me about 35 minutes to xfer 100 disksides (=50disks). This includes all handling, inserting/removing disk.. Roughly 21 s per diskside (if i didn't miss that mathlecture in school)..
If we assume we are reading "normal" disks, and convert them from nib>.d64 you get a .d64 with errorinfo, the result is the same weither the program is designed to get an exact copy of a disk or not ?
If we are reading disks that are known to be originals, that is a different case.
..although, i haven't quite understand if there is a point saving .nib-files when reading/converting normal disks into d64 later on ?
Personally, i only run in DOS, i have some old machine for this purpose :)
so... nibread y/n ?
/Jani
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 |
Quote:If we assume we are reading "normal" disks, and convert them from nib>.d64 you get a .d64 with errorinfo, the result is the same weither the program is designed to get an exact copy of a disk or not ?
i am not sure how nibtools work, but generally nibblers do not try to interprete the data they are reading. that way they can read/copy data that has intentional errors etc, but the backdraw is that they can not decide wether an error is intentional or not. a program that only ever expects valid data can retry until all data has been read error free, a nibble generally gives up relativly quickly and assumes the data is supposed to contain errors.
so as for nibtools, i'd atleast make sure that there are options which allow me to disable all the magic and enable all errorchecking (which essentially would degrade the program to a simple parallel copier).
oh and - saving the .nib files makes sense indeed, so you can go back to them whenever you stumble about a d64 which does not work because the original disk used some strange loader, or uses 40 tracks for example. |
| |
Mace
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 1799 |
Using SC for transfering crappy disks takes AGES.
So, like Swasti, I'm looking for a tool that does the job a bit faster. There are 3000 floppies waiting here...
NibTools has the option to reread on error. And the user can determine how many times.
So what Groepaz says, is not entirely valid here: NibTools _does_ know when there's an error, just like SC. But then, NibTools just copies them, while SC keeps nagging me.
In the end, both results have errors, but Nib took less time.
The drawback is that NibTools is a bit less user friendly than SC, especially in naming the files. |
| |
Mason
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 459 |
Quote: Hello all, a few thoughts on the way...
I run a 1541-II with paracable, best speed i have gotten with SC is somewhere around 20-25 sec.. dont ask me why :)
Nibread actually boosts down to 10 seconds, i rushed the thing a bit, just for kicks, it took me about 35 minutes to xfer 100 disksides (=50disks). This includes all handling, inserting/removing disk.. Roughly 21 s per diskside (if i didn't miss that mathlecture in school)..
If we assume we are reading "normal" disks, and convert them from nib>.d64 you get a .d64 with errorinfo, the result is the same weither the program is designed to get an exact copy of a disk or not ?
If we are reading disks that are known to be originals, that is a different case.
..although, i haven't quite understand if there is a point saving .nib-files when reading/converting normal disks into d64 later on ?
Personally, i only run in DOS, i have some old machine for this purpose :)
so... nibread y/n ?
/Jani
Well the reason why we started to look at nibtools to transfer the disks is because it autodetects 40 tracks if its there and it handle the special bytes.
Theres several examples where disks were transferred and we have to ask the owner again or wait till the disk shows up in some other disks so we can nibble transfer it using nibtools.
There can be a different way to handle the errors, but maybe its one of the thing the coder of nibtools should look at. |
| |
sailor
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 90 |
Sorry for being unclear, with "normal" disks i meant disks _known_ to be using tracks 1-35 only and no fancy loaders..
But yes, with unknown content, everything should be read :)
/Jani
|
| Previous - 1 | ... | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 28 - Next |
