I was not sure which sub-forum to use for this post, as all seem oriented towards "Burners" only.
@Franksoy, Pardon me in advance for referring to your post(in advance.)
Franksoy made the following remark in Post #383 of this thread:
"I've been having second thoughts about the 6S since yesterday night... from the additional data gathered by searching the forum and the WWW, I think I'll go for a 16P9S (ROM) which looks great as a reader/ripper, and seems to be an exception to the rule that ROM drives aren't usable scanners." (my italics)
Was this remark in earnest? or Was it made due to dissatisfaction with the scanning of the LH-18A1P?
Possibly, OFF thread: :flower:
On the other hand, I have read in several posts by several moderators that DVD-Rom drives are not recommended as PIPO scanners of DVD media.(to the degree of being an axiom.)
Some moderators have also remarked that ANY drive, when reading data from a DVD, must perform error correction. So, if the manufacturer of the drive has included error correction reporting ability in the firmware and the drive's chipset supports reporting of error correction, why would PIPO scans performed by a DVD-Rom be any less "usable" than scans done by DVD burners?
Could it be that the type of errors being reporting by DVD-Roms are "not as useful" as Dragemester has remarked in several posts? Are there technical differences in the reading of discs and the performing of error correction by DVD-Roms as opposed to DVD writers? Is the error correction reporting algorithm in the firmware of DVD-Roms any different from that in DVD writers? Are manufacturers cost-cutting to the bone on DVD-Rom drives to point of putting useless error reporting ability in them?(Why not just leave it out of the firmware?) Basically, I have not found any clear "explanation" as to why writers are superior for PIPO scanning(being a part of the "reading" process as opposed to the "writing" process). Are the drives in CATS machines writers as well?(I know I shouldn't compare to consumer drives, sorry.) :doh:
Back ON thread:
My REAL questions are:
Owners of the Lite-On SOHD-16P9S, Is it a "usable" scanner as remarked by Francksoy?
@Franksoy, have you bought the 16P9S yet? and if so, what are your thoughts in comparing it to the LH-18A1P as a scanner?(I didn't want to PM this.)
From someone thinking to purchase an LH-20A1P mostly for scanning(despite all the conflicting reports on this line). :bigsmile: