|
Halcyon -> RE: Another perspective on LiteOn drive modification (7/30/2004 3:51:13 PM)
|
I know, I know. I'm too verbose.
The point is just to try and understand things better though.
So if any of you have ideas on this subject, please post.
Also, I know and respect your (CDRInfo) work hugely already Emperor, so don't take all of my silly questions as something pointed at your work.
I wait anxiously of all your measurements and as said before, you are doing wonderful work. I learn a lot from reading your reviews and posts (like I also learn at cdfreaks and cdrinfo).
I'm just throwing in a question or two, when I think there's something I need to understand or if there's a subject that I think might need discussing.
I'd really love the "scene" (if there's such a thing) to come together and standardize on scanning tool data output and pull together a database of scans.
This way we could statistically analyze the results and take the anecdotal evidence to a higher level of reliability.
That is, we would have a better chance of knowing which drive/firmware produces a decently compatible burn with which media/version/speed.
I would be really useful to drive buyers, media buyers, firmware hackers and even optical drive manufacturers/designers.
In fact, my current belief is that it would be more worthwhile than just pure Pulsetec drive based analyzer scans (as also those are a single snapshot onto the reading process, as we have discussed in other threads).
Unfortunately, my skills and employment do not allow me to pull such a thing by myself nor do I possess the required contacts to get people interested in it (i.e. Erik Deppe, Nic W, Karr Wang, all the forum owners, etc).
So, I try to raise this idea every now and then to see if it makes sense to others, who are perhaps in a better position to take advantage of such ideas, in case they are deemed worthwhile.
Cheers,
halcyon
|
|
|
|
