Anders Karlsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2/13/06, Joerg Schilling <[email protected]> wrote:
> [snip]
> > - Older CD-writers identified as WORM although a CD-R is not a WORM.
>
> Nitpicking I know, but technically, CD-R is WORM in the case of single
> session write. And as long as the writer works, who cares if it is
> labled WORM, CD-R or Earthworm..
If you did know what a worm is, you would know that you are not correct:
A WORM allows you to randomly write any sector once.
A CD-R does not allows you to do this.
J?rg
--
EMail:[email protected] (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[email protected] (uni)
[email protected] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
>> Nitpicking I know, but technically, CD-R is WORM in the case of single
>> session write. And as long as the writer works, who cares if it is
>> labled WORM, CD-R or Earthworm..
>
>If you did know what a worm is, you would know that you are not correct:
>
>A WORM allows you to randomly write any sector once.
>A CD-R does not allows you to do this.
>
Nitpicking2, the CD-R case is a limitation of the cd writer ;)
Sadly there is no packet mode for CDRs. It would outbeat multisession.
Jan Engelhardt
--
On Monday 13 February 2006 10:12, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Anders Karlsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 2/13/06, Joerg Schilling <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > > - Older CD-writers identified as WORM although a CD-R is not a
> > > WORM.
> >
> > Nitpicking I know, but technically, CD-R is WORM in the case of single
> > session write. And as long as the writer works, who cares if it is
> > labled WORM, CD-R or Earthworm..
>
> If you did know what a worm is, you would know that you are not correct:
>
> A WORM allows you to randomly write any sector once.
>
> A CD-R does not allows you to do this.
Joerg, the practical definition of WORM is "Write Once, Read Many" - whether
or not it supports writes to random sectors is a moot point, a CDR does seem
to fit the bill of a "write once, read many" medium.
DRH
"D. Hazelton" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If you did know what a worm is, you would know that you are not correct:
> >
> > A WORM allows you to randomly write any sector once.
> >
> > A CD-R does not allows you to do this.
>
> Joerg, the practical definition of WORM is "Write Once, Read Many" - whether
> or not it supports writes to random sectors is a moot point, a CDR does seem
> to fit the bill of a "write once, read many" medium.
What you believe is irrelevent as long as it does not match the WORM device
definition.
See http://www.t10.org
J?rg
--
EMail:[email protected] (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[email protected] (uni)
[email protected] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 08:55, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> "D. Hazelton" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > If you did know what a worm is, you would know that you are not
> > > correct:
> > >
> > > A WORM allows you to randomly write any sector once.
> > >
> > > A CD-R does not allows you to do this.
> >
> > Joerg, the practical definition of WORM is "Write Once, Read Many" -
> > whether or not it supports writes to random sectors is a moot point, a
> > CDR does seem to fit the bill of a "write once, read many" medium.
>
> What you believe is irrelevent as long as it does not match the WORM device
> definition.
>
> See http://www.t10.org
>
> J?rg
Joerg, I didn't say it was what _I_ believed. What I said was "WORM" means
"Wrint One, Read Many" - since a CDR can be described in that fashion, it
does match the description. Since it matches the description, most people
lump the CDR medium in with all "WORM" medium. Is that clear enough?
DRH