3 ms·
The other commenter is also right, but CD-RW also had two fatal flaws: 1. It was notoriously unreliable. Data would fail to write and corrupt the disk. Disks w
by bastawhiz 4y ago
The other commenter is also right, but CD-RW also had two fatal flaws:
1. It was notoriously unreliable. Data would fail to write and corrupt the disk. Disks would often fail after a few uses.
2. It was horribly slow, both to read and write (in my experience). In many cases it was faster to burn a CD-R with lots of files instead of moving individual files to a CD-RW.
Maybe it was just my computer at the time, but CD-RW was more of a novelty than anything. It could have been good, but it simply just didn't do what it said on the tin.
- bombcar 4y agoI remember having a burning program that would let you “append” to a CD-R somehow, which took care of 80% of what I would have needed cd-rw for anyway.
- andrewmackrodt 4y agoWindows XP also supported this natively, i.e. track at once rather than disc at once behaviour.
- Scoundreller 4y agoI think that was DirectCD. Nice thing about it is that you'd never get buffer underruns for some reason. Can't use it for cd audio of course, but yes for mp3s!
- xen2xen1 4y agoDirectCD, that's a name I'd nit heard in many years...
- wkat4242 4y agoMulti-session the tech was called. Though marketed by vendors under different names.