Re: Need help from digital backup experts - UDF & SP2

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:27:07 -0600, All Things Mopar
<nunofyour@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Today Bill Funk commented courteously on the subject at hand

I answered before. UDF /is/ packet writing, and it /does/
work on SP1, and it /is/ supported by SP2 if one reads the
M$ specs. Bill, why the hell would M$ suddenly abandom an
increasingly popular format when they re-wrote Windoze?

Sorry, I didn't see the answer.
Well, Pcket writing isn't as reliable as straight writing.
Never has been. There have always been issues with
different drives and OSs reacting differently than the
original writing setup.

Since I have no commercial CDs or DVDs "burned" with UDF, I
can't test those.

No small wonder; commercial CDs aren't burned, they are
pressed. The don't use packet writing, they use Joliet.
I would think M$ did, but that is an ass/u/me.
I would also think that the original and current beta
testers SP2 would've found this problem, and maybe they
did. Developers don't always fix problems, even if they
know about them. Or, there may be some security related
issues native to SP2 that make a fix problematical.

I know, Bill, that's why I put quotes around "burned". But,
UDF was /invented/ for the DVD industry, to allow longer file
names, longer volume names (when read on a PC, that's
irrelevent in a TV DVD reader), and most especially, when DVD
burning on PCs began some years ago. But little understanding
of packet writing is that it is much more efficient for this
purpose, particularly for the 4.7 andd 8.x gig DVDs in use
today.

They understood the problem, and don't use packet writing.
The problem is indeed inhereht in XP, and not just SP2.
That yours worked until SP2 was installed is somewhat
quirky, but not unexpected. XP simply does not support UDF
as strongly as earlier versions of windows.
Why? Because UDF is considered not necessary anymore. It
was originally done to counter high CDR prices. But with
CDR prices under a quarter, Joliet writing is abotu as
cheap as anyone needs. Thus, the lack of good support.

Can't say that the problem is inherrent to XP, Bill. Please
re-re-re-read my posts. I ran many years with Win XP Pro SP1
with nary a problem, albeit only CD-Rs. Ditto for my nephew
and the others, and their remaining SP1 boxes still work
100.000% today. But, as soon as they upgraded to SP2 or bought
a new one with it pre-installed and Bang! - instant crashes.
I'm sorry, but that isn't "quirky", it is completely
repeatable.

As to others not understanding me, that's my point. If you
don't use UDF, you don't have the problem. Since your life is
perfectly happy, don't start. But, please, please, please
don't take me on for being a troll because I do. And,
questions and snide comments from those who neither understand
nor experience this discomfort helps no one, it just creates
dissention amongst friends. OK?

Meanwhile, I've uninstalled both drives and deleted the
udf...sys files, and re-detected the drives to see if that
helps. Testing is just starting on that.

Thanks.

Sorry, but the reality is, you are using a system that is
unrelaible from the get-go.
Bottom line, use Joliet.

http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpcd.php
http://www.nero.com/nero6/eng/Support_News_SP2_Packet_Writin
g_Problems.html

So, Bill, what do I do about file names longer than 61 (the
extension counts in the Joliet 64 limit)? Create massive text
files with the correct names, then use NameWiz to "fix" them
before burning? And, if M$ supports UDF, why the hell don't
/they/ verify that it works? Further, and back to my original
point, why is it that SP1 was so reliable for so many years
for so many people, yet it instantly was broken when they
moved to SP2. So, I'm sorry for being rigid and obstinate, but
I'm not a fatalist. I believe there /is/ an answer without my
having to compromise my work-flow. Now, Ed Ruf and some others
are going to attack me for that position, which is fine.

Meanwhile, I've got a day of testing to do, and most likely,
quite a bit more frustration coming as I re-install Roxio, on
the percentage that one of those /did/ break SP2, not the
other way around. If I find that out, I will call them, not
Redmond. And, again, in a day or two, whether I have this
fixed or just have a progress report, I'll post here.

You and others might wonder why I posted here in the first
place. Well, the subject of how to backup and preserve
graphics files comes up all the time, and I thought maybe,
just maybe, that somebody has seen this and knew how to fix
it. I don't expect this NG to be a PC tech support forum. It
is what it is, full of interesting people who know far more
than me about digital cameras and computer graphics.


You're tilting at windmills here.
Packet Writing does not work reliably in XP. That's a reality. Why it
doesn't is unimportant.
What you do with your longer filenames is up to you. Use more folders
under your root. Use shorter folder names. Include a readme.text file
on your disks. Do whatever you need to do. But if you insist on using
Packet Writing, you *will* have problems.

Backing up graphics problems isn't a problem to the vast majority of
people. If you choose a method that isn't reliable, you'll have
problems. That's life.
If you really want to get UMF to work, it's up to you to find the
magic combination of system files, writing software and drives that
works for you. There is no magic bullet. No one else can do this for
you because your system is unique.
I gave you two referrences to the fact that this is not recommended.
Microsoft has told you it won't work reliably. What more do you want?
When something breaks and can't be fixed, replace it. Your system of
using Packet Writing is broken, and can't be reliably fixed. Replace
it.
That's life.

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Need help from digital backup experts - UDF & SP2
    ... Today Bill Funk commented courteously on the subject at hand ... and it /is/ supported by SP2 if one reads the ... the lack of good support. ... I ran many years with Win XP Pro SP1 ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Switching fat32 to NTFS and Back Again
    ... UDF (packet writing) has always been problematic.. ... MVP - Windows Shell/User ... We do that because our systems work with SP2 installed, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: 4/12/05 vs. Tax Professionals Deadline of 4/15/05. WHAAAAAT!!
    ... Well, my dear OzieBill, the answer to your question is a very simple one. ... Ever since opening up my own office over ten years ago, ... support since opening my office in 1994. ... dealing with installing SP2 until after April 15th. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Need SP2 Stand Alone Complete IE 6 install Package
    ... > world of Windows) IE 6. ... I do not want to try to uninstall SP2 ... > Software/Hardware support engineer. ... on Advanced and choose Download only. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6.setup)
  • Re: Wainig for latest service pack
    ... but - know that she is on a mission to educate certain folks about the impact this SP2 scenario has on small businesses. ... it's SOP for the CSS rep to send you an email prior to connecting to your server. ... The decision you took to bring in local support was yours to take, but doesn't change the CSS position. ... destroys my trust on Microsoft totally. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)