On Wednesday 03 May 2006 00:29, Eben King wrote:
> On Tue, 2 May 2006, Bob Stia wrote:
> > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 16:28, Eben King wrote:
> >> Problem: DVDs use the "HD vendor" definition of GB, 10^9 B, whereas ls
> >> and friends use the "everywhere else in computers" definition of GB,
> >> 2^30 B. 4.7 * 10^9 B = 4.38 * 2^30 B. And 4.5 > 4.38. Did you take
> >> that into account?
> >
> > Noooooo...Because all of the mailing lists dealing with ripping/copying
> > say to keep it under 4.7GB and it will work OK.
>
> They're probably dealing primarily with users of a two-bit OS which instead
> of reporting file size in some appropriately-sized unit, always uses
> something tiny. So they see a file size of 4,500,000 KB and that's OK,
> since 4,500,500 KB (using 1024 B/KB) is 4.29 * 2^30 B, which fits. But if
> you see "4.5 GB", that's greater than the DVD capity of 4.38 GB, so it
> won't fit.
>
> > Could have sworn that media from a different manufacturer (Memorex) could
> > handle an "everywhere else in computers" file size of 4.5GB.
>
> Dunno. I think DVD format (and hence capacity) is standardized.
> Overburning works sometimes on CDs; I haven't tried it on DVDs, but it's
> worth a shot. Try dummy/practice/test mode first.
Thanks Eben and all the rest of you. My education is getting better.
Bob S.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 18:38:09 EDT