Unfortunately, this site has restricted functionality as this browser does not support the HTML button formaction attribute.
Unfortunately, this site has restricted functionality as this browser has HTML web storage turned off.

Game ISOs compared to Game Rips. by The Crazed Asylum (TCA)

2 of 2 files lump
  • TXT / Text   Drama or political
  • 3 kB   DOWNLOAD   SHARE
hide RetroTxt from Defacto2   The open source WebExtension to view many ANSI, ASCII and NFO files in a browser. Available for Chrome Firefox Brave Edge.
[+] Configuration Select all
Hello ISO scene

[ ISOS vs RIPS ]:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Im sure everybody today enjoys ISOS when compared RIPS for a number of
reasons.

GOOD POINTS:

* You get everything that is on the original CD.

* No nasty CD Check problems will happen.

* Todays RIPS generally are followed by a barrage of addons, which often add
  up to pretty close the full cd in the end, so you might as well get the
  ISO to begin with.

BAD POINTS:

* ISOS are larger and take longer to transfer.

* ISOS use RAR.


[ RARs and ISOS ]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Trading or leeching ISOS often results in bad rars. In a perfect world, with
perfect transfer systems this wouldnt be a problem, but the odd byte goes bad
and is the norm when all these megabytes are being moved.

GOOD POINTS:

* Good compression

* Available on a wide variety of platforms.

* The AV option adds extra error catching data.

BAD POINTS:

* Sites cant /dont verify rar files as they are being uploaded.

* Many releases dont have CRC files which help you find bad rars.


[ ARJ: The solution ]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

I think it can be safely said that RAR has failed in regards to its error
tracking system. The ISO scene is in a bit of a mess because CRCs files are
required to find bad rar files. Siteops are required to often physically
check files themselves against CRC files and they arent always around.

GOOD POINTS:

* It is simple to use.

* You can individually check each ARJ file.

* Just like ZIPS, ARJs can be checked while being uploaded.

* Each ARJ file can be checked individually for errors.

* It splits files just like RAR.

* Available on a wide variety of platforms.

BAD POINTS:

* Not as fast as RAR

* Not as good compression.

[ Overall ]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

I think it can be safely said the time saved by having your files checked
while you upload totally cancels out the good points of RAR. Overall the
time saved by using ARJ completely cancels any argument that can be made for
RAR.

I hope everyone in the ISO scene from the releasers to the siteops and traders
realises that what I have said is true, and quickly switches over to ARJ. It
would make life much easier for everyone in the end. So leaders everywhere,
stand up and make the sensible decision.

Ive included a URL where the different versions of ARJ can be grabbed as a
start:

                      http://ultra.glo.be/tsf/index.html

Super and Lump
iso.scene.summary.txt 80x90 Font
80