CloneCD, an Elaborate Hoax?

vbimport

#1

I just posted the article CloneCD, an Elaborate Hoax ?.

Here’s some interesting information regarding the method that CloneCD uses to back-up CD’s. It seems CloneCD doesn’t really do what it says it does… Here are some interesting parts of the…

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/2498-CloneCD-an-Elaborate-Hoax-.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/2498-CloneCD-an-Elaborate-Hoax-.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Who the hell cares what CloneCD does in the background? The copies made with CloneCD work great and that’s what we want. It even can creat a blank CD as long as I put it in the drive and it works. :4


#3

Tell me something i don’t know. I wandered about the same subject for a long time.


#4

It would be nice if Olli were to comment on this matter… In the meantime I’ve set up a little poll in the CloneCD forum. Could be interesting.


#5

This article must be at least 18 month old or there was something very similar, I recall


#6

@rexroach Yes the article is a little old (don’t know when it was written, but the file is dated from 28-8-01) but we were waiting on a comment from Olli… We contacted him some weeks ago.


#7

IgD wrote something very similar awhile back… this looks just like his rant… someone probably cut and pasted it up here.


#8

the only reason i can think of for it being a hoax is if clone was working wit safedisc creators os something similar. in whish case they would time the arrival of new protections very specifially with clones capabilities to always have something missing. anyone any other suggestions?


#9

I don’t really understand the point you’re trying to make. When all the information a CD-ROM-drive can get from a sector is “error”, than writing a CD that also returns “error” from the same sector is as perfect as I can imagine.


#10

Please read the text of this newsposting very good before posting a reaction. This is NOT the opinion of CD Freaks, but the opinion of the author of Fireburner, we could say; “a competitor of CloneCD”


#11

ehem… by the AUTHOR OF FIREBURNER! anyone sense some sort of alterior motive here…


#12

So thiss IS the reason why Clonecd can’t create perfect copy’s of SD2.


#13

First of all, this entire thread is a complete waste of time. Why would the creators of CD-Freaks participate in a “He say - She say” high scool rant is beyond me. Bringing this matter to Olli’s attention is about as childish as it gets. I mean who gives a damn if it doesn’t copy a certain way? CloneCD makes great working copies of all known protected CDs. In fact, no other application comes close to competing with it. Bottom line: If it works and works well, everything else is irrelevant. Secondly, Fireburner is one of the worse burning applications available. Hell, you can use NERO and CloneCD and all your copy needs are met. If you want to make a few coasters, then download a copy of FireBurner. It will make a coaster even if you have Burn-Proof Technology on your drive. The author should be paying us money to use that piece of crap. Lastly, Is it just me or has the quality of news on this site gone down hill?


#14

Please tell me, in what PRACTICAL sense are the copies made by Clone CD not perfect? Name one instance where you can do something with the original that you can’t with the copy. Bottom line, who cares how Clone CD works, it gets the job done better than any other duplicator. Ally


#15

No, the reason CloneCD doesn’t make perfect copies of SD2 is because you are using a drive that can’t write bad sectors. CloneCD is the software that arranges the data. If your burner doesn’t support the info being sent to it in the proper fashion, then of course it’s not going to work. CloneCD is a great peice of software.


#16

Who cares about how CloneCD works in the background?! As long as my copies work, I am fine with that. Just because the FireBurner sucks ass…


#17

btw, isnt this hoax being mentioned some time ago allready ? I remember the same hoax posted on cdfreaks… on wich olli posted some replies a couple of days later to explain it so I think its quite normal he doesnt react on it again:)


#18

Ya know, every once in a while the freaks come up with some shit. This is another example of it. CloneCD works for me and I will not be swayed easily. Other apps will have to beat CloneCD not just talk shit.


#19

as the article snip at top says it is a “biased opinion” on clonecd. so obviously things being said will be against clonecd, whether or not clonecd works well. and the fact that the fireburner creator wrote it doesn’t help much either. it’s like asking a bmw engineer why mercedes sucks and vice versa. i agree with a lot of you, clonecd works, and it works for me. so i have nothing bad to say about it.


#20

This a REALLY OLD article, which is written by the author of the FireBurner program. It seems he wants people to use FireBurner and not Clone :r Anyway this is Oli’s reply, taken from CD Media World: I’ve seen, that you opened a discussion about “CloneCD - An Elaborate Hoax”. Just my comments: Of course - CloneCD can’t make a “perfect” copy of data it cannot read. That should be obvious. I think it wasn’t necessary to prove this :slight_smile: In case CloneCD detects a bad sector, it will display an error in the logfile. Well, displaying an error should give the user a hint, that the copy can’t be “perfect”. If the data can’t be read, dummy data is created that can’t be read either. If the Original can’t be read, and the Copy can’t be read - isn’t that as a close as “perfect copy” can be? The author talks a lot about read errors. Come on, do SecuROM CDs have read errors? AFAIK CloneCD is the only CD-Duplicating program in the world, that can make a working safety backup of e.g., Revolt (SecuROM) without bypassing the copy protection. What has this to do with read errors? Why can CloneCD overburn with Sony and HP Burners, but other programs can’t? Does this have anything to do with read errors? The author talks about bypassing copy protections. I want to make it perfectly clear, that CloneCD does not and never has bypassed any copy protection. It does not decrypt, descramble or modify the data it reads in any way. Important: The data it “reads”. Read errors are - Errors. The data can’t be read. In conclusion, calling CloneCD a hoax and calling me a liar is very bad attitude (and wrong, too), and leaves a foul taste in the mouth, especially from an author of a competing product. I asked the author of the article for a public apology, but he didn’t reply. Regards, Oliver Kastl