Thread: DMS vs. ADF
View Single Post
Old 15 October 2001, 02:31   #7
Strange Days
|cy[ool's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Melbourne/Australia
Age: 42
Posts: 147
This isn't the old days, and we aren't all limited to 1200bps modems and 200 meg harddrives. There is zero extra work involved in writing an adf to a disk, infact u probably have to type even less, since it doesn't require all the BS options that undms uses.
The only upside to DMS is that it does use compression, and sometimes u will get disks you can't extract.. because the original program didn't encode them properly..thus making the images somewhat useless.
Renaming DMS' isn't an option..the crc's always change if you alter any of the default options for ripping a disk.
Its marginally faster to write out an adf, since its not compressed..
In conclusion (in todays days ) ADF is far superior to DMS as it doesn't require any fucking around... What do you think UAE does when it loads a DMS?.. extracts it to an ADF and uses that, and since many more programs require an ADF format than a DMS one, it makes sense to use what is A) supported more widely & B) much cleaner.
ADF Please

Oh...on a side note to Galahad,
I think a disk mag should really be on a disk since thats what its meant to be. Surely 2 disks of quality info would suffice for 1 issue. Bigger isn't always better (in the computing world ).
|cy[ool is offline  
Page generated in 0.05592 seconds with 9 queries