KryoFlux: IPF write support - Page 6

mr.vince · 28 October 2011, 19:54

Yay! And it really looks cool on the desk!

nnever2000 · 24 November 2011, 21:39

Is possible to use KryFlux to create the ipf file from the original?

desiv · 25 November 2011, 02:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by nnever2000

Is possible to use KryFlux to create the ipf file from the original?

Yes and no.. ;-)

Kryoflux doesnt create IPFs..
It creates stream files (or ADFs, but that loses a lot of protection stuff..).

You can send in your stream files to SPS I believe to get an IPF if one doesn't already exist.

They are planning on adding creating of a format directly called "draft," which will be like a end-user version of an IPF supposedly...

desiv

pmc · 25 November 2011, 08:41

For me, the way write support is currently implemented for Kryoflux is a bit of a downer personally.

It's a little annoying that you can read into various formats but these formats aren't the ones that can then be written back to disk.

Why no ability to write the stream files back to disk? That would surely mean you could then read and write any type of disk you wanted to; from protected right through to standard AmigaDOS format disks.

I suppose there'll be a good technical reason for the above, just curious really...

Alpha One · 25 November 2011, 10:20

100% agree. At least the writeback of ADF's could have been implemented meanwhile. Why did I sell my Catweasel card?! :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pmc

For me, the way write support is currently implemented for Kryoflux is a bit of a downer personally.

It's a little annoying that you can read into various formats but these formats aren't the ones that can then be written back to disk.

Why no ability to write the stream files back to disk? That would surely mean you could then read and write any type of disk you wanted to; from protected right through to standard AmigaDOS format disks.

I suppose there'll be a good technical reason for the above, just curious really...

mr.vince · 25 November 2011, 12:37

Yes, we could do so many things if we would do this for a living...

The past weeks were spent for C64 support and implementing this into the IPF format.

I have explained the "problem" with writing uninterpreted raw data in several other places. A good protection will create ambiguity or put data where the write splice is (you remember, these cylinders can't overlap). In both cases you will need to file a decision, and this needs to be done by an expert.

That said, writing of STREAM or DRAFT will come, but it will always be a 90% solution. There will be titles that can't be written this way. We always made it clear that this is an imaging solution meant for preservation. It was never intended to become a sole copier, and I think it never will be.

Writing of standard disks, e.g. ADF or D64, will be easier to implement, but still take time. I also miss these features, but again... we have a time budget and I can't work around it.

We understand some people would appreciate this, and it's on the todo list. As you might have noticed, we're actively developing it. But this can only happen in our spare time.

IFW · 25 November 2011, 12:38

Writing data to a floppy disk is not a simple matter, if reliability is a concern.
Data was never duplicated blindly, there is a very good reason why duplicators required a complete understanding of the data that had to be written.

What you read from a floppy disk (e.g. stream files) is never ever what you need to write back to a disk to read the same data again... It works to some degree if you write the flux transitions back as is, but it would be practically an analog copy, ie quality does degrade and it is possible that even a first generation write would not work correctly.
We prefer to have quality associated with KryoFlux rather than those technically poor solutions, that might work occassionally...

Having said that with some post-processing it might be possible to write back stream files with a greater level of success, but the amount of work involved may not warrant the quality of results - diminishing returns applies.

As it is, the current KryoFlux hardware and software is at the same level of quality (or better) than professional duplicator machines that were used for writing the disks.
To maintain that level of quality for writing copy protected software detailed mastering data must be supplied, e.g. an IPF file that can describe exactly what and how to write.

The writing of sector images is something that will happen.
I'd appreciate some feedback on what formats people would like to see, an easy guess would be ADF

mr.vince · 25 November 2011, 12:43

Funny. Two guys. Two messages. Nearly same content.

pmc · 25 November 2011, 12:45

Yeah, as I said - I'm sure there are good technical reasons why this stuff isn't as easy as it sounds.

Would be nice to be able to write .adf as a minimum though.

I recently could have really done with the ability to write an .adf to disk for some testing I was doing.

mr.vince · 25 November 2011, 12:47

Fully agreed. ADF would be nice to have, as well as IMG and D64, which will cover 95% of systems actively used.

Jope · 25 November 2011, 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.vince

Fully agreed. ADF would be nice to have, as well as IMG and D64, which will cover 95% of systems actively used.

+1 for ADF and D64. :-)

D71 and D81 come as a close second in my interests. :-)

WayneK · 25 November 2011, 14:06

Another +1 for ADF and D64 (or is that +2?) - this was part of the reason I bought a KryoFlux, in common with many people on EAB it seems.
And I fully appreciate this isn't your 'day job', which is why you haven't seen me taking to forums/PM's whining about the lack of support for <format X>... on the other hand, staying silent for a year hasn't produced results either, so consider this my 1-off whine for the year

desiv · 27 November 2011, 18:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by WayneK

..whining about the lack of support for <format X>...

What, they don't support format X?? Dang it.. I'm not buying one now!
...
er.. wait, I already did, and think it's great..

Quote:

Originally Posted by WayneK

on the other hand, staying silent for a year has so consider this my 1-off whine for the year

Actually, within that year, they promised write support and have delivered IPF write support.
So, +1 there..
Yes, it's slow going, but they have been delivering on what they said.
They have said they will add write support for other image formats (ADF, etc.), so I can wait....

All in all, I'm happy with my Kryoflux..

..and besides, the "nerd cred" I gain at work telling people I have a device that will read the flux transitions from a floppy.....

Priceless...

desiv

mr.vince · 27 November 2011, 20:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by desiv

..and besides, the "nerd cred" I gain at work telling people I have a device that will read the flux transitions from a floppy.....

Priceless...

WayneK · 28 November 2011, 12:03

Actually, I bought it months after they promised write support - the year was the time since I bought it (Nov 2010) so... sorry, no +1 there...but I must admit I laughed at your nerd cred line!

Plagueis/KRX · 23 December 2011, 02:45

I purchased mine a weeks ago, on a binge of buying Amiga hardware (and a memory of Wayne mentioning the Kryoflux a year ago), but soon realized I probably should have held off for a while.

It was my fault for getting eager with the PayPal button though, since I did read the specs and rather than reading with skepticism, I allowed myself to get taken in by what looked like a huge list of features I can't live without. The reality is that I am thrilled with being able to read my non protected floppies into .adf format, and the device is worth the cost for that alone, yet the limited writing capability (and the lack of reading to .IPF) is definately disappointing. When I purchased the Kryoflux I was confused by all the SPS business and thought you could both read and write .IPF images. Oh well... hopefully the features will fill out in 2012...until then, it's a useful device for what it does, though if I had had this for a year I'd be getting a bit impatient.

mr.vince · 23 December 2011, 20:26

Automatic creation of IPFs is not something we have planned. This is due to the many complications as this is _NOT_ a process that should be automated. Master disks aren't just duped in the factory. The author submits a script that clearly defines what is going to be written where.

You risk getting a bad IPF very easily when you are using an automated process. Keir has developed such process, which works for a (felt) dozen of formats and protections, but will fail for anything more advanced. This is meant for basic stuff, e.g. plain Amiga DOS disks or simple stuff like density based Copylocks. There's more info on this on our forums. Enjoy but please be warned that such IPFs are not checked for integrity or authenticity. You will not see if data is modified, you just "stuff" it in the IPF container which can then be used to write it.

Apart from that we always clearly said / wrote that this is an imaging device and writing is just a bonus, which explains the priority we have for ADF and co. It will come, but we all have jobs and family, so unless someone wants to finance us full time, this will take the time it takes...

Alpha One · 24 December 2011, 11:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.vince

Apart from that we always clearly said / wrote that this is an imaging device and writing is just a bonus, ...

Well but the hardware is pretty useless if endusers like me can only "backup" discs to an imagefile which we are not able to write back.

It's like a photocamera that takes photos which can not be watched.

Uhm.. Merry XMAS by the way.

mr.vince · 25 December 2011, 00:06

I don't think that is a good comparison, as you can for sure access the data. Anyway, I said we made it clear where the focus is. We delivered everything we promised so far. But I also outlined why it takes time to do things. Anyone interested in speeding things up can donate, as we don't charge anything for software from private users. Donations help taking unpaid leaves from daytime jobs.

As I said, there's the code Keir developed. It works with standard ADOS and some protections. You can back up and write back - give it a try.

And yes... Merry Christmas & The Season's Greetings.

EDIT: And just to make sure... Yes, ADF Support is being worked on.

ramparts · 25 December 2011, 08:16

Let me see if i get it straight i am going to buy a 95 euros board that backups copy protected disks to adf format and doesn´t writ it back again ???

Can at least make copy from original source disk to floppy (backup)??

25 December 2011, 00:06	#119
mr.vince Cheesy crust Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Hawk's Creek Age: 48 Posts: 1,383	I don't think that is a good comparison, as you can for sure access the data. Anyway, I said we made it clear where the focus is. We delivered everything we promised so far. But I also outlined why it takes time to do things. Anyone interested in speeding things up can donate, as we don't charge anything for software from private users. Donations help taking unpaid leaves from daytime jobs. As I said, there's the code Keir developed. It works with standard ADOS and some protections. You can back up and write back - give it a try. And yes... Merry Christmas & The Season's Greetings. EDIT: And just to make sure... Yes, ADF Support is being worked on. Last edited by mr.vince; 25 December 2011 at 08:12.

25 December 2011, 08:16	#120
ramparts Registered User Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: porto/portugal Posts: 50	doubt Let me see if i get it straight i am going to buy a 95 euros board that backups copy protected disks to adf format and doesn´t writ it back again ??? Can at least make copy from original source disk to floppy (backup)??

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Winuae Kryoflux support	Joe Maroni	support.WinUAE	19	04 September 2013 14:36
KryoFlux: IPF write support	mr.vince	project.SPS (was CAPS)	0	07 July 2011 12:41
KryoFlux Support Thread - post all your problems here	billy	project.SPS (was CAPS)	10	29 April 2010 18:18
WinUAE-X v8 IPF support?	alexh	project.SPS (was CAPS)	10	25 April 2006 17:15
write the ipf´s back...???	Joe Maroni	project.SPS (was CAPS)	7	08 April 2003 14:16

28 October 2011, 19:54	#101
mr.vince Cheesy crust Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Hawk's Creek Age: 48 Posts: 1,383	Yay! And it really looks cool on the desk!

24 November 2011, 21:39	#102
nnever2000 Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: italy Posts: 138	Is possible to use KryFlux to create the ipf file from the original?

25 November 2011, 08:41	#104
pmc gone Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: completely gone Posts: 1,596	For me, the way write support is currently implemented for Kryoflux is a bit of a downer personally. It's a little annoying that you can read into various formats but these formats aren't the ones that can then be written back to disk. Why no ability to write the stream files back to disk? That would surely mean you could then read and write any type of disk you wanted to; from protected right through to standard AmigaDOS format disks. I suppose there'll be a good technical reason for the above, just curious really...

25 November 2011, 12:37	#106
mr.vince Cheesy crust Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Hawk's Creek Age: 48 Posts: 1,383	Yes, we could do so many things if we would do this for a living... The past weeks were spent for C64 support and implementing this into the IPF format. I have explained the "problem" with writing uninterpreted raw data in several other places. A good protection will create ambiguity or put data where the write splice is (you remember, these cylinders can't overlap). In both cases you will need to file a decision, and this needs to be done by an expert. That said, writing of STREAM or DRAFT will come, but it will always be a 90% solution. There will be titles that can't be written this way. We always made it clear that this is an imaging solution meant for preservation. It was never intended to become a sole copier, and I think it never will be. Writing of standard disks, e.g. ADF or D64, will be easier to implement, but still take time. I also miss these features, but again... we have a time budget and I can't work around it. We understand some people would appreciate this, and it's on the todo list. As you might have noticed, we're actively developing it. But this can only happen in our spare time.

25 November 2011, 12:38	#107
IFW Moderator Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: ... Age: 52 Posts: 1,838	Writing data to a floppy disk is not a simple matter, if reliability is a concern. Data was never duplicated blindly, there is a very good reason why duplicators required a complete understanding of the data that had to be written. What you read from a floppy disk (e.g. stream files) is never ever what you need to write back to a disk to read the same data again... It works to some degree if you write the flux transitions back as is, but it would be practically an analog copy, ie quality does degrade and it is possible that even a first generation write would not work correctly. We prefer to have quality associated with KryoFlux rather than those technically poor solutions, that might work occassionally... Having said that with some post-processing it might be possible to write back stream files with a greater level of success, but the amount of work involved may not warrant the quality of results - diminishing returns applies. As it is, the current KryoFlux hardware and software is at the same level of quality (or better) than professional duplicator machines that were used for writing the disks. To maintain that level of quality for writing copy protected software detailed mastering data must be supplied, e.g. an IPF file that can describe exactly what and how to write. The writing of sector images is something that will happen. I'd appreciate some feedback on what formats people would like to see, an easy guess would be ADF

25 November 2011, 12:43	#108
mr.vince Cheesy crust Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Hawk's Creek Age: 48 Posts: 1,383	Funny. Two guys. Two messages. Nearly same content.

25 November 2011, 12:45	#109
pmc gone Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: completely gone Posts: 1,596	Yeah, as I said - I'm sure there are good technical reasons why this stuff isn't as easy as it sounds. Would be nice to be able to write .adf as a minimum though. I recently could have really done with the ability to write an .adf to disk for some testing I was doing.

25 November 2011, 12:47	#110
mr.vince Cheesy crust Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Hawk's Creek Age: 48 Posts: 1,383	Fully agreed. ADF would be nice to have, as well as IMG and D64, which will cover 95% of systems actively used.

25 November 2011, 14:06	#112
WayneK Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Somewhere secret Age: 50 Posts: 364	Another +1 for ADF and D64 (or is that +2?) - this was part of the reason I bought a KryoFlux, in common with many people on EAB it seems. And I fully appreciate this isn't your 'day job', which is why you haven't seen me taking to forums/PM's whining about the lack of support for <format X>... on the other hand, staying silent for a year hasn't produced results either, so consider this my 1-off whine for the year

28 November 2011, 12:03	#115
WayneK Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Somewhere secret Age: 50 Posts: 364	Actually, I bought it months after they promised write support - the year was the time since I bought it (Nov 2010) so... sorry, no +1 there...but I must admit I laughed at your nerd cred line!

23 December 2011, 02:45	#116
Plagueis/KRX coder Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: a galaxy far far away Age: 49 Posts: 84	I purchased mine a weeks ago, on a binge of buying Amiga hardware (and a memory of Wayne mentioning the Kryoflux a year ago), but soon realized I probably should have held off for a while. It was my fault for getting eager with the PayPal button though, since I did read the specs and rather than reading with skepticism, I allowed myself to get taken in by what looked like a huge list of features I can't live without. The reality is that I am thrilled with being able to read my non protected floppies into .adf format, and the device is worth the cost for that alone, yet the limited writing capability (and the lack of reading to .IPF) is definately disappointing. When I purchased the Kryoflux I was confused by all the SPS business and thought you could both read and write .IPF images. Oh well... hopefully the features will fill out in 2012...until then, it's a useful device for what it does, though if I had had this for a year I'd be getting a bit impatient.

23 December 2011, 20:26	#117
mr.vince Cheesy crust Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Hawk's Creek Age: 48 Posts: 1,383	Automatic creation of IPFs is not something we have planned. This is due to the many complications as this is _NOT_ a process that should be automated. Master disks aren't just duped in the factory. The author submits a script that clearly defines what is going to be written where. You risk getting a bad IPF very easily when you are using an automated process. Keir has developed such process, which works for a (felt) dozen of formats and protections, but will fail for anything more advanced. This is meant for basic stuff, e.g. plain Amiga DOS disks or simple stuff like density based Copylocks. There's more info on this on our forums. Enjoy but please be warned that such IPFs are not checked for integrity or authenticity. You will not see if data is modified, you just "stuff" it in the IPF container which can then be used to write it. Apart from that we always clearly said / wrote that this is an imaging device and writing is just a bonus, which explains the priority we have for ADF and co. It will come, but we all have jobs and family, so unless someone wants to finance us full time, this will take the time it takes...

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)