Multibooter

Recovery specimen #4 - a perfectly readable DVD, but 1 file differs from the other backup DVD As I mentioned above, I always created 2 backup CDs/DVDs of each set of data to be backed up. But I have one pair of DVDs where 1 file differs. The file in question is a 691MB .ace archive file and contains inside a .ccd image (CloneCD) of a CD. On one DVD the 691MB .ace archive extracts fine, on the other DVD the .ace archive is broken and doesn't extract. A binary compare with Beyond Compare/Hex Viewer indicates that the two .ace files have different non-zero content in one contiguous block of 362 bytes. Here the history of the "bad" DVD containing the broken .ace archive: This DVD was burnt on 26-Aug-2006 as replacement of another backup DVD, burnt about a year earlier, because the disk quality of the initial DVD had deteriorated substantially. This replacement DVD, containing the corrupt .ace archive, was burnt with Nero v6.6.0.13, by first creating with Nero "Image Recorder" a temporary .iso of the deteriorating original backup DVD and then burning the replacement DVD from this .iso. I then made a binary compare of the burnt replacement DVD and the .iso, mounted with Alcohol, which was Ok, and I noted this on the DVD. This replacement DVD had a disk quality of 95/100 just after burning, measured with Nero CD-DVD Speed v4.7.7.15. I have just re-checked its disk quality with the same tool, it is currently, 6 years later, 48/100, still in Ok condition. So why did the "bad" DVD contain a broken archive? I checked my notes for 26-Aug-2006 and actually found 2 cryptical entries "Nero burns not-identical files, no msg" and another entry that I had rejected on that day a Targus 7-port USB hub Model PAUH212, "does NOT work with Belkins USB 2.0 PC-Card, problem with Nero when using Adaptec USB 2.0 PC-Card: large files on burnt DVD are incorrect, without a message (found out with binary compare)". I apparently had suspected a hardware problem to be the cause of the non-identical files. I remember vaguely to have repeated the burning of the DVD from the .iso, and that the binary compare against the .iso was Ok, but the binary compare against the other backup DVD showed a difference. I had no explanation for this difference, and couldn't decide which one of the 2 DVDs was better, so I kept both versions. After I stopped using the Targus hub, this burn problem didn't occur anymore. The real reason, however, that this problem didn't come up anymore was probably that I haven't burnt replacement DVDs after that experience, checking disk quality and re-burning CDs/DVDs was just too time-cvonsuming. Looking back, I probably made the wrong conclusions 6 years ago. Today I would rather speculate that Nero v6.6.0.13 "Image Recorder" had an issue reading the deteriorating original DVD and created somehow an iso with 362 contiguous wrong bytes. A binary compare of the DVD burnt from such an iso against the same mounted .iso would then be identical, and a binary compare against the other good backup DVD would show differences. But I have no idea why this area with bad data was only 362 bytes, not a whole 2kB sector, I suspect that the gradual decay of plastic media is a major cause of broken archives. At eMule maybe 5% of archive files (zip, rar) are broken. Maybe the great number of different versions of an mp3 at eMule, often between 10 and 30 different version for one original mp3, is brought about by the decay of plastic and the selection of the option "Ignore read errors" when CDs are copied. MP3Test, for example, is a very good tool to test mp3 files for corruption. I was able to repair with WinAce v2.6 the broken 691MB .ace archive on the "bad" replacement DVD. The .ccd image extracted from the repaired .ace was identical to the .ccd image contained on the other good backup DVD.

Thanks submix8c,this explanation and the sample files solved the question. I'll leave filelist.dat, created during the installation, in the installation source, so that there is no potential issue during the installation from a CD. When the installation source is located on the HDD, filelist.dat is not required in the installation source, the installer creates it there. If the installation is from a CD, as with the NSW 2004 CD, filelist.dat is probably required for the installation to proceed. I prefer this initial build v6.0.2600.0000, if I have to, it was made before Sept.11. Who knows what is contained in later versions and builds. I have installed IE 6 under Win98 only on my old laptop, not on my desktop. I don't use IE 6 often, maybe once every 2 weeks, mainly when I want to print a web page and the other browsers can't print it out properly, sometimes IE6 can print the page Ok, every browser prints differently. Installing IE v6.0.2600.0000 (and higher), instead of v5.5, for example, also causes the sluggish-file-delete-problem of Windows Explorer under Win98SE. IE 6 is required for the installation of some software versions, starting with Paint Shop Pro 8 or Photoshop 8. Thanks again.

Internet Explorer v6.00.2600 of 20-Aug-2001 (full source, with all the foreign language support modules) can be downloaded (76.7MB) from http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/browsers.evolt.org/browsers/ie/win32/6.0/ie60.exe Double-clicking on the downloaded ie60.exe creates the folder \IE 6.0 Full\, containing the installation source. ie60.exe is an "UnZipSFX 5.32 of 3 November 1997, by Info-ZIP (Zip-Bugslists.wku.edu)", wku.edu stands for "Western Kentucky University", so this is probably an unofficial repack. It extracts the identical stuff contained, for example, in the folder \SUPPORT\MSIE\ of the Norton SystemWorks Professional 2004 CD, minus filelist.dat [which is on the NSW 2004 CD], plus IEAK6.EXE, plus CDINST.INI. The timestamp of ie60.exe, as displayed by MiTeC EXE Explorer, is 12/3/2019. When you click on the extracted \IE 6.0 Full\Ie6setup.exe, the installation of Internet Explorer 6 starts. Before the installation there is no file "filelist.dat" in the installation source \IE 6.0 Full\, after the installation the file "filelist.dat" was added to the installation source \IE 6.0 Full\. filelist .dat is 22 bytes long, with the following content: [General] Version=1 The file modification date of filelist.dat is the respective installation date of Internet Explorer 6.0 What is the purpose of filelist.dat? I am very wary of software which modifies the installation source. In addition .dat files raise a red flag with me, like the index.dat files, which are pre-rootkit, "cloaked" log files by Microsoft. What would happen if Internet Explorer 6.0 were installed from a CD (read-only media), containing the folder \IE 6.0 Full\, with or without filelist.dat? Can Internet Explorer be installed from a CD without filelist.dat? Do any good things happen if Internet Explorer 6 is installed with a changed value of Version in filelist.dat, e.g. '0', maybe '1' means YES, '0' perhaps NO??

Recovery specimen #3 - a DVD+RW I just gave up on recovering a bad Memorex DVD+RW (re-writable), burnt in February 2004, 8 years ago. It contained 4.1GB of data, altogether 17 zipped up system backups. The DVD+RW was accessible in only 1 of my 5 excellent readers, an Asus blu-ray burner BW-12B1ST, which seems to be good at reading +media. 2 good readers capable of DVD+RW wouldn't even recognize that a DVD was inserted. The silver color of the front side of the DVD, where "Memorex - is it live or is it a Memorex?" was printed, had turned a little yellowish, aging plastic. The Asus blue-ray burner with Unstoppable Copier was able to recover 3 good zip files, altogether 735MB, so about 80% of the data on the bad DVD+RW was lost. I had a note on a piece of paper with this bad DVD, dated December 2006, indicating that the content of the DVD was still Ok (binary compare) 2 1/2 years after burning. It is interesting to note that adding a 3% recovery record with WinRAR to a .rar file is of little use if the file is stored on a CD/DVD and the whole file becomes unreadable. I had buffed the bad DVD+RW with the Aleratec, altogether 5 times, and each time the recovery got worse. I decided to give up on the recovery, the remainder of the data was probably unrecoverable, and I had a still good backup on a second DVD-R. When I burnt backup DVDs, about 5 to 8 years ago, I ALWAYS burnt 2 identical good copies, in case one goes bad. Usually I burnt more than 2 copies, on top-rated media with a burner which "liked" the particular media, until the burn quality with Nero Speed Disk was 95-98/100, and then discarded those DVDs with a lower burn quality. I have transferred the content of maybe 80 old DVDs, burnt between 2003 and 2007, onto external HDDs over the past 2 years. It was probably the last call, even if the DVDs were stored in slim cases in a cool place. The disk quality, as measured by Nero Speed Disk, had gone down to zero with most DVDs. Maybe 10 of these 2x80 DVDs had serious read issues and 5-10% of the archive would have been lost if I had not burnt 2 backup DVDs for each set of data backed up. I hope that the transfer from plastic media to HDDs will be complete by the end of this year, it's a quite time-consuming undertaking.

I don't agree with the opinions and conclusions of the author of that article, Mr. Silva of About.com, who covers under "http://hometheater.about.com" mainly video DVDs, where a couple of skips don't matter. Some of Mr.Silva's factual claims are incorrect, for example:"In addition, with the rapid acceptance of recordable DVD, no one has done an extensive evaluation of the dozens of brands of DVD-R/-RW/+R/+RW/RAM discs now available for preserving video at home on DVD." I have been following, for at least 8 years, the very detailed tests and evaluations of CDs, DVDs etc. of the German Computer Bild, which is Europe's best-selling computer magazine, bi-weekly about 100 pages each, paid circulation 540.000, published in nine countries, not dead yet http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Bild , unlike the computer magazines in the US, rest in peace. Here the current rankings and evaluations of DVD media in their tests: http://www.computerbild.de/bestenlisten/Die-besten-beschreibbaren-DVDs-3913586.html The top ranking DVD+R has a rating of only 2.85 (scale: 1=excellent, 6=trash). I wouldn't buy a product with such a poor rating by Computer Bild, unless there were special reasons. If you look at the color of the ratings (this needs no translation from German), the top ranking DVD was rated as belonging to the yellow zone (green - yellow - red). There was no DVD brand in the green zone.

Hi M()zart,I had tried CDCheck v3.1.14 http://www.kvipu.com/CDCheck/ two years ago, but rejected it. The files "recovered" by CDCheck may NOT be correct, and sometimes differ from the files recovered by Unstoppable Copier (with the setting "Auto Skip Damaged Files") or recovered by Beyond Compare. When a file is recovered as a "good" file by Unstoppable Copier or Beyond Beyond Compare, it is good, you can count on it. On the other hand, I could not extract some cab files "recovered" by CDCheck, while their counterparts recovered with Unstoppable Copier or Beyond Compare could be extracted. I had also tried Dead Disk Doctor v1.26 http://www.deaddiskdoctor.com/ two years ago, but the files it recovered, over and above those recovered by Unstoppable Copier or Beyond Compare, were bad. A test-installation, for example, of a software containing such a file "recovered" only by Dead Disk Doctor resulted in the termination of the software installation. Dead Disk Doctor resolves the issue of what to do with the areas corresponding to bad sectors in an interesting way: bad areas are apparently filled with random characters, which may be useful for movie DVDs, but not for software CDs/DVDs. The key to the recovery/repair of a bad CD/DVD is not software, but hardware. Since 2 programs work fine and reliably (Unstoppable Copier and Beyond Compare), I see no point in looking further for something which doesn't enhance the recovery/repair of a bad CD anyway. I am not covering here the repair of damaged copy-protected CDs. I am not into computer games, I don't like copy-protected software and the software would have to be really good to overcome my dislike, as for example the Oxford English Dictionary v3.0 (the 4 meters of books on the shelf). Old CloneCD v5.211 could handle a lot.

Aleratec CD/DVD Disc Repair Plus This machine does work http://www.aleratec.com/disc-repair.html and http://www.amazon.com/Aleratec-240131-Disc-Repair-Plus/dp/B000E4K2GO/ . I have now repaired/recovered a 2nd CD, an old original, pressed MS Win95 OEM CD (file modification dates 11-Jul-1995, the CD had only ISO 9660, no additional Joliet, and was not bootable). The CD had developed by itself over time 2 cracks at the outer rim, and had also a couple of scratches. The DVD burner, which was the top reader of the first CD I had repaired (see above), was able to read only 62 out of 1535 files. The best reader for this particular bad CD was the blu-ray burner Pioneer BDR-203; the other blu-ray burner in my arsenal of excellent readers, an Asus BW-12B1ST, was just stuck reading the CD for maybe 1-2 hours, until I canceled. I was able to create a good iso from this CD with this burner a year ago, but only during a single read of many. I wasn't able to read the CD properly again, so I had put it away, marked "unresolved problem, resolve it later". This iso was unfortunately created by UltraISO, so I didn't know whether the .iso was good or contained zeroes for bad sectors. Buffing means here to remove a thin layer of the plastic of the CD with some kind of fine sand paper. I buffed the CD two times with the Aleratec, but the Pioneer blu-ray burner, which was my best reader of this particular bad CD, still created an iso with bad sectors with ImgBurn. Finally, after having buffed 5x, the Pioneer could read the CD properly, without bad sectors. The other burners could still not read the CD buffed 5 times. The previous CD (also pressed) which I had buffed and repaired before, also had started to become more readable after buffing 5 times. Each buffing cycle treats the bad CD for about 2 minutes with this special sand paper. In the case of this 2nd bad CD, I did not need to use of the various sets of good files created by Unstoppable Copier, but the creation of these sets of good files with various burners had shown me which one of my burners was best at reading this specific bad CD. I knew in this way which burner to use to check whether the Alaratec had gone deep enough into the plastic of the CD, or whether I should keep on buffing. The consumables (the wheels with the special sand paper and the polishing paste) are quite expensive, so the cost of materials for creating a good iso from this CD was maybe $3, plus 3 hours of fiddling around. The Aleratec is highly recommended, probably the best of its kind. The only critique: the power supply is only 110V and it's inconvenient to switch between the 2 sets of wheels in the repair process. I will eventually buy a second unit. Blu-ray disks are not on the list of media which the Aleratec can repair, so blu-ray disks are probably unrepairable media. Before repairing bad CDs/DVDs or recovering data from them, one should ask oneself: Is the stuff on the CDs/DVDs really worth the time and effort?

Congratulations! This is a major finding.

Why archive software CDs/DVDs? First of all, as I mentioned above, I don't consider plastic media to be a good long-term storage solution. The purpose of my archiving CDs/DVDs onto HDDs is to get away from CDs/DVDs and other plastic media. In other words, I am migrating from plastic to HDDs. 1 HDD is easier to back up than 300 CDs/DVDs. Here some advantages of CD-Rs and DVD-Rs, which are useful, but may eventually become legacy media, just like 1.44MB floppies or 240MB LS-240 diskettes: a) CDs/DVDs are read-only media and stuff on them cannot be infected after burning; .exe files on an archive HDD can become infected by .exe infectors after archiving. I know of no malware which can infect .iso files, so stuff archived on a HDD as .iso is currently pretty safe. What I don't like about .isos is that there is no software which can repair damaged isos, at least as far as I know. b ) CDs/DVDs are mechanically quite stable and don't die if you drop them c) CDs/DVDs are a small separate storage media for stuff I don't want to have on my archive HDDs, like infected stuff, viruses, trojans, riskware, malware and other stuff. I keep, for example, on an especially marked CD some specimen of the Tenga virus, of Tenga-infected files and of possible causes of the Tenga infection, as souvenirs of a really bad infection 2 years ago. I also keep software containing password-protected stuff on a separate CD, one never knows what's in it. d) you can dispose of CDs/DVDs quite easily in the garbage, or use them as coasters under your cup. Disposing of HDDs is a little more time-consuming, since they should be wiped before being taken to a recycler of electronic trash. Other stuff I back up to CDs are photos and compilations of installation sources of actually used, good software, for convenience and as additional backups on different media. All my "Source" and "Photo" CDs are also archived as .iso on HDDs. I don't archive/back up stuff to DVDs anymore. In the US I use Taiyo Yuden TYG02 DVD-Rs, which I bought from ebay as a cake of 100 about 3 years ago. In Europe I am using RitekG04 DVD-Rs, bought in a supermarket under the "Octron" label about 7 years ago. The Octron DVD-Rs had an excellent burn quality initially, but the burn quality of DVDs burnt from them has deteriorated steadily over the years, plastic media deteriorates regardless whether burnt or still blank. The whole issue of "burn quality" of plastic media is a time-wasting headache. With HDDs you don't have the issue of "write quality", at least it hasn't surfaced. I actually would prefer a 1TB HDD where the data stays Ok for 50 years, rather than a 50TB HDD, where the data stays Ok for 1 year. I have no idea whether there are HDDs with archival storage quality. I didn't know that DVD media had jumped in price. Again, I haven't bought plastic media for backup in years, only special media like CD-RW, DVD-RW, BD-R and BD-RE for experimenting. Maybe the prices of blank DVD media have jumped because of the flood in Thailand, like with HDDs, which have more than doubled in price.

All CDs and DVDs will eventually become bad and unreadable. Pressed silver CDs, e.g. from MS, tend to be Ok still after 10 years, although there plenty of exceptions. Burnt CDs tend to have a life span of around 3-7 years, although I still have a couple of good CDs burnt around 15 years ago. How to identify bad CDs/DVDs A CD/DVD can be checked for bad sectors with ImgBurn by creating an image file from the CD. If no message like "Uncorrectable Error" is displayed, the CD/DVD is Ok and contains no bad sectors. ImgBurn also displays which file is affected by the specific bad sector. ClonyXXL v2.0.0.6 , a copy protection scanner, has a bad sector scanner and could be useful to check whether a CD with bad sectors is copy-protected or not. Copy protection schemes often use intentionally bad sectors, and it would be useless to just wash or buff such a CD/DVD or read it in many times, bad sectors were put there for a purpose. ClonyXXL v2.0.0.6 can access CDs in an external USB enclosure under Win98SE, but not under WinXP. ClonyXXL v2.0.0.6 cannot check DVDs, only CDs. ClonyXXL helps to identify those CDs with bad sectors which in some jurisdictions should not be archived. ImgBurn does not give a warning when the CD/DVD has bad sectors created intentionally for a copy-protection scheme, but displays normal messages like: "Failed to Read Sector xxxx - Reason: L-EC Uncorrectable Error Sector xxxx maps to File: \Lock\Lock.dat" (as a hypothetical example, the file name of the first bad sector could give a clue) or: "I/O Error! .... Device: .... Interpretation: .... CDB Interpretation: Read CD - Sector xxx ... Sense Area Interpretation: L-EC Uncorrectable Error" How to Repair a bad software CD/DVD (non-bootable, no copy-protection): Step 1: Decide whether it is really worth the expense and effort to recover/repair a particular CD/DVD. Recovering/repairing bad CDs/DVDs can be VERY time-consuming. If a copy-protected software CD goes bad, an attempt at recovery may probably not be worth while. The recovery of one really bad CD took me about 2-3 days, and I took it as an enlightening experiment. I was very lucky then that I had found good replacement files for all unrecoverable files (see Step 12), otherwise the whole recovery effort would have been in vain. When you embark on recovering/repairing a bad CD/DVD, you don't know the outcome. It may well be that the bad CD/DVD can never be repaired. Step 2: Get your tool box together, like: a) at least 3 CD/DVD/blu-ray burners which are very good readers in general b ) ImgBurn v2.5.6.0 c) Unstoppable Copier v5.2 (WinXP) or v3.56 (Win98, does NOT copy zero-size directories) d) an Aleratec DVD/CD Disc Repair Plus, model 240131 e) Beyond Compare v2.5.3 and the Hex Viewer plugin f) UltraISO v9.3.6.2750 g) ClonyXXL v2.0.0.6 h) 7-Zip v9.20 i) 20GB of free space on a HDD for repairing CDs, 100GB for repairing DVDs I have in my toolbox 5 different burners which are excellent readers. One reader may be able to read some sectors which another reader can't., maybe because of different alignments, maybe because of different hardware/firmware capabilities. It's a matter of trial and error, and collectively these good readers can recover a lot of stuff on bad CDs/DVDs. Copying the content of a bad CD several times, e.g. with Unstoppable Copier or Beyond Compare, with the same burner may result in different sets of good recovered files. Reading a bad CD/DVD by sector, i.e. by creating a .iso file, has somehow produced more good files than reading a bad CD by file (as with Unstoppable Copier), no idea why. I have kept a really bad CD as a tool to test the reading ability of burners. Somehow blu-ray burners and burners which can read/write Mount Rainier tend to be good readers, maybe because they have a particularly good error correction to compensate for the many errors on blu-ray and CD-RW media. One good reader I obtained by chance from an old PC, which a friend wanted to dispose of. After looking over his old PC I kept a couple of components, including the burner, and then took the remainder together with other stuff to a recycling drop-off. The reading ability of a good reader may deteriorate quickly after reading for many hours over the same bad sectors on a bad CD/DVD. One reader may be good for +DVD media, another for -DVD media, it's a matter of testing. I have my good PATA and SATA readers in external USB enclosures, so they can be hooked up easily to any of my computers. On my list of projects I still have an old SCSI burner, which I would like to put into an external USB enclosure, any ideas are appreciated. Step 3: the bad CD/DVD is washed with tap water and a mild dishwashing liquid, as used when washing dishes by hand, plus a good rinse. Step 4: the bad CD/DVD is read in by sector (e.g. by UltraISO -> Tools -> Make CD/DVD Image, or by ImgBurn ->Create image file from disc), creating a pre-buffing iso image, with zeroes instead of bad sectors. If you use ImgBurn, and ImgBurn does not display an error message about a bad sector, then washing the CD/DVD was enough, and BINGO, you're done. It is better to use in this step ImgBurn, rather than UltraISO. because ImgBurn creates a log file/error report, which allows to deduce that files not listed as having bad sectors, were read Ok. The log/error report by ImgBurn should be saved for later reference and analysis. UltraISO does not have a detailed log, but is easier to use, with fewer options and settings where one could make a mistake. CloneCD v5.211, for example, is not useful for this step. CloneCD v5.211, when it encounters a bad sector during the creation of a .iso apparently tries to replicate the bad sector in the file mapped to the bad sector. As a results, when a file containing a bad sector is accessed on a mounted .ccd, e. g. with Windows Explorer under WinXP for a file copy, you get the error message: "Error Copying File or Folder. Cannot copy xxxx: Cannot read from the source file or disk". MagicISO v5.5.0281 seems to fill a whole file with zeroes if only one of its sectors is bad, so it's not useful in this Step either. ImgBurn v2.5.6.0 and UltraISO v9.3.6.2750, on the other hand, replace just the bad sector area in the file with zeroes. One interesting difference between the various iso programs is how they handle bad sectors. Step 5: the bad CD/DVD is read several times by file by Unstoppable Copier, with various good readers, creating several sets of good files Unstoppable Copier must have the setting "Auto Skip Damaged Files" selected, also "Include Sub Folders"and "Copy Empty Folders". I obtained the best results when "Set Maximum Retries" had the value 20 (possible range: 0 to 99). Beyond Compare could also be used to create the various sets of good files, but Beyond Compare does not display the number of Skipped Files as an easy single number. The reader which creates the set of good files with the most files in it, is the reader which can handle this specific bad CD/DVD best. Step 6: the bad CD/DVD is buffed 5-10 times with the Aleratec DVD/CD Disc Repair Plus machine, removing a thin layer of plastic from the CD/DVD. The resulting CD/DVD is basically a different bad CD/DVD, with some previously bad sectors/files perhaps readable. Step 7: try to create an image of the bad buffed CD/DVD with ImgBurn with the best reader for this CD, as identified in Step 5, creating a post-buffing iso image. There may be a chance that ImgBurn does not display an error message about a bad sector. If so, you are lucky, BINGO, a good .iso image was created, and you may proceed to step 15. Step 8: the bad buffed CD/DVD is read several times by file by Unstoppable Copier, with various good readers, creating even more sets of good files. Step 9: the various sets of good files (maybe 20GB altogether, for a single bad CD), produced by various reads and readers before and after buffing, are merged into a single good set with Beyond Compare. Step 10: with Beyond Compare the mounted iso image (pre-buffing or post-buffing), containing the original structure of the CD/DVD, is compared against the set of merged good files (Step 9); and a list of missing files (= the bad files which could not be recovered from the bad CD/DVD) with filenames, bytes and dates is prepared manually. Step 11: The files on the list of missing files are individually read from the bad buffed CD/DVD by Unstoppable Copier, with retries=99, and with all good readers. Any good, additionally recovered files are merged into the merged set of good files. Step 12: Other possible sources (related CDs, older or newer versions of the software CD, google/bing, eMule, ftp search) are searched for the bad/missing files, with the same file name, file size in bytes and similar modification dates. This step can be crucial for repairing.of the CD. In one recovery attempt 2 apparently good replacement files were found via google. Subsequently, however, continued buffing with the Aleratec machine produced 2 good files, which differed by 5 bytes in the header from the files found via google. The files recovered after buffing with the Aleratec machine and those found via google were .DL_ cab files and contained identical DLLs, so the slightly different replacement files found via google may perhaps have worked, even if they were not identical to the original files on the bad CD. Replacement files from related CDs (e.g. CDs by the same software/CD producer, with different versions of the software, DLLs etc. tend to be re-used) have been the best source of good replacement files. Step 13: Any found replacement files are compared in Beyond Compare/Hex Viewer against the corresponding file in the pre-buffing and post-buffing iso images. All bytes of the replacement files should be identical to the files in the mounted .iso, except for the zeroed out "holes" in the .iso files, i.e. the good sectors of the bad files on the .iso should be identical to those of the replacement files. Step 14: a copy of the the pre-buffing (or post-buffing) iso image is opened in UltraISO. All files and folders of this iso image are deleted in the UltraISO window, so that an empty shell remains, with some of the properties of the original .iso file.The set of good merged files (files and folders) is then dragged and dropped into this empty shell. . Finally, this shell with the new content is saved as a new .iso under a different name, e.g. "repaired.iso". Step 15: Integrity check with 7-Zip: all archive files (.DL_, .EX_,, .IN_ etc) in the mounted repaired .iso should extract without error messages, see There is a good chance that the repaired CD/.iso works as well as the original CD. Step 16: file cleanup: delete again the various sets of of good files. There may be many files and folders to be deleted; during the recovery attempt of one CD (not DVD!), 21 sets of good files were deleted, with 100.000+ files. The recovery of a single DVD may require 100GB of free HDD space for maybe 20 sets of good files The repaired .iso should contain the structure/shell of the original CD, the set of merged good files from maybe 20+ reads, and replacement files from other sources for the non-recoverable files.

Thanks for the warning about incompatibility with Win9x. The readme.rtf of Total7zip v0.8.5.2 states "Full support for Unicode and other innovations of the latest Total Commander."Around 2007/2008 I downloaded about 70 Total Commander plug-ins, which are now in my archive, including wcx_7zip-0.5.5.zip, in case a need arises. On a first check, the wayback archive contains descriptions back to v0.7.0.7, but not the actual zip files http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.totalcmd.net/plugring/Total7zip.html A lot of old versions could be found with the google search string "index of /" wcx 7zip but I will have to check out first whether Total7zip is what solves the problem. This exactly shows the usefulness of such a search tool, if you archive your CDs centrally as .isos

Thanks for the tip, Drugwash. Total7zip 0.8.5.2 http://www.totalcmd.net/plugring/Total7zip.html seems interesting.

On my rather old harware USB 3.0 can do that in 7 sec. On a razor-edge hardware, it can go down to about 3 sec. Using XP in both cases, of course Hi dencorso,,That sounds very impressive, but not sure about caching effects. A real-life test would be to low-level format a 1TB HDD with HDD Low Level Format v2.36. On my 2.2MHz dual core desktop (USB 2.0 onboard) under WinXP it takes about 10 hours (about 27MB/s), on my 11-year-old 700MHz Dell Inspiron 7500 laptop (USB 2.0 PCCard) about 25 hours (about 11MB/s), when a 1TB 7200 rpm SATA HDD ["3.0Gb/s"] is in an external EZ-Dock docking station. The full version used to be free, but now the free version has a speed limitation of 50MB/s, http://hddguru.com/software/HDD-LLF-Low-Level-Format-Tool/ excellent program. The fastest interface for Win98 seems to be eSATA, about twice as fast as USB 2.0, but I am not yet sure about the reliability of eSATA.

Sorry, your "switch to MS-DOS mode" rung the wrong bell with me, "Restart in MS-DOS mode" rings of course the Shutdown-issue bell of Win98 and Geforce cards. In any case, welcome to the Win98 forum. I checked again, I do not have an issue after "Restart in MS-DOS mode" the way I set up my hardware and software under Win98. After I entered the EXIT command, Win98 restarted fine on my system BTW, the window "Shut Down Windows" on my computer under Win98SE has an additional selection "Stand by", which I never use. Also, your window "MS-DOS Prompt" displays © 1981-1998, my computer displays © 1981-1999, so I would speculate that you are running Win98 FE, which may perhaps be the cause of your problems. P.S.: I just checked the \WINDOWS\ folder of the Win98SE opsys, and it did not contain a file dosstart.bat

1) Win98SE Explorer has serious issues. To copy, move or delete files I always use Beyond Compare, never Windows Explorer.2) I always do file copying, moving or deleting under WinXP, very rarely under Win98. 3) Under WinXP I rarely use Windows Explorer, nearly always Beyond Compare for file operations 4) After copying files with Beyond Compare, I always make a binary compare with Beyond Compare of the source and the target. 5) If you use several computers simultaneously, speed becomes a secondary concern. The integrity of the copied data is the key thing. I knew a German engineer who used to say: "Langsamer ist schneller", i.e. "slower is faster". Copying with an eSATA PC card is much faster than with a USB 2.0 PC Card, but I have postponed using my eSATA PC Cards because I don't yet trust the integrity of the data copied with it. The speed of the CPU and the rpms of the HDD are among the key factors for the resulting transfer speed. 6) I try to stay away from Seagate, even if I have quite a few of them, I don't entrust my data to a Seagate. I have my backups on 7200 rpm Hitachis and Samsungs, in USB docking stations and in Thermaltake enclosures.

Hi Joseph_sw,I am usually using 2 computers (and 2 screens) simultaneously. Both computers are connected via a network. When one computer is running WinXP, and the other computer is running Win98SE I can use Win98 Find on the the Win98 computer to search the WinXP computer, including NTFS partitions. Win98SE, via a network, can access, read and write to NTFS partitions on a computer running WinXP. So one alternative to using WinXP Search is to use Win98 Find on a Win98 computer connected via a network. With Kaspersky Anti-Virus v6 under Win98SE, for example, I can check the NTFS partition of a computer running WinXP if both computers are connected via a network. That's why a good router, a good network setup and a second computer could be a feasible alternative to migrating, multibooting or running a virtual PC. That's also why I have posted earlier comments about routers, off-topic at first glance.

Hi bphlpt,Eventually high connection speeds will become cheap, what I don't have now, I may have later. I just want to get a router which works invisibly in the corner for the next 10 years, which works fine with all new stuff I may need during the next 10 years, where no government spy is hidden and where the bogeyman doesn't come out of the router box to haunt me.

Hi jaclaz,isos are a tricky subject matter, and if it doesn't have a GUI, it's too complicated for me. Here a good overview of various programs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_disc_image_software UltraISO v9.3.6.2750 is my preferred tool under Win98SE and WinXP to edit isos, it's just a delete/drag-and-drop. The following uses could come to one's mind: 1) repairing of bad CDs, especially bootable CDs, by replacing corrupt files in the .iso with good original files 2) cleaning of infected CDs, especially bootable CDs, by deleting the infected stuff. There is a rumor that in some countries a CD-full could be bought for one USD, including critters 3) repairing of bad downloaded isos which contain e.g. broken .avi files; after cutting off/repairing the bad sections in the .avi, the .iso/CD is again in a useful condition I try to stay away from new features which don't exist under both Win98 and WinXP, unless absolutely necessary.

This does not happen on my desktop under Win98, with a bfg 7800 GS OC card and Geforce v77.72, and a 1600x1200 ViewSonic monitor. Full-size DOS window and regular DOS window work fine.

Hi rloew,With one wireless router in Europe the 3rd digit is 2, and I wasn't able to change it to 1, like for my other routers. That means whenever I am there I have to change the Windows IP settings for the gateway, of the laptop I take there, and to change it again when I am back in the US. Thanks for your hint, VERY helpful. Your Buffalo has apparently only 100 Mb Ethernet, like my current spare router. My son does games etc. on the internet, and he complained already that the spare router is too slow, with a 100Mb cable connection, so I probably will get a faster/Gigabit router. Your Buffalo router is on the dd-wrt compatibility list, have you installed the dd-wrt firmware in your router? dd-wrt firmware is open-source, so no government spyware. When I looked at their page about "Static DHCP" http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Static_DHCP I saw the mule, my favorite animal, and my router-phobia was forgotten.BTW, I am not yet sure whether Static DHCP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Host_Configuration_Protocol is for me. I have maybe 8 Netgear WPN511 wireless PC Cards, for my Inspiron 7500 laptops in various locations. Some WLAN cards were assigned under Windows the same IP number, even if they have different MAC numbers. Static DHCP seems to require the assignment of a unique IP number for every MAC number. Under Win98 I may reach unknown territory with the maximum number of instances of TCP/IP (the default maximum is 6, Win98 has been running Ok for me with MaxInstance set to 16 in section [MSTCP.ndi] in NETTRANS.INF, WinXP apparently does not have a restriction on the number of TCP/IP instances). The user manual http://support.asus.com/Download.aspx?SLanguage=en&p=11&m=RT-N66U%20%28VER.B1%29&os=8 did not mention Static DHCP, but perhaps with the dd-wrt firmware the router will have Static DHCP. I have been looking at the Asus RT-N66U router, quite pricey http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-reviews/31687-asus-rt-n66u-dark-knight-dual-band-wireless-n900-gigabit-router-reviewed?start=1 This router seems to be in demand, the salesman at Frys told me that the day after they get a shipment the shelf is empty again. This router is also on the dd-wrt compatibility list http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices#Asus No idea whether this compatibility list is reliable, if not I'll have a $180 brick. My network printer HP2605d is not on the [uSB] printer compatibility list by Asus, but that doesn't matter since the printer works fine via Ethernet, under Win98 and WinXP. Any comments?

Thanks rloew. I will look into it when I eventually have to get a replacement for my broken wireless router in the next couple of weeks, my wife complains already about those Ethernet cables lying around all over. I have been putting off the purchase of a new wireless router always to the next week, maybe I am suffering from router-phobia.What complicates matters is that the computers have to work in the home networks in 3 countries, with 3 different ISPs, with ADSL and cable modem connections, and with routers of different makes/country settings/voltages, and with a different digit in the third field of the IP number. I probably will have to buy 3 identical routers. Any advice is appreciated, thanks again rloew. During a recent garage sale I bought a good shrink-wrapped Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition, with 25 Client Access Licenses, for $3, and 3 thick books about Windows 2003 Server by Jerry Honeycutt, at the used book store of the public library, for $5. Would there be any benefit to migrate from Win98 to Windows 2003, instead of WinXP? Is there any use of installing Win2003 as an additional operating system selection, besides WinXP? Could one expect the support of Win2003 to go beyond that of WinXP? In other words, if one decides to move on from Win98SE, would it be better to move on to WinXP or to Win2003?

Good idea, definitely useful for inspecting individual files.It could perhaps also be done in Beyond Compare/Hex Viewer by creating a blank file containing only zeroes, and then comparing various DLLs against this blank file. On the left side of the Beyond Compare/Hex Viewer window is a sliding bar window, with lines or rectangles, depending on the size of the file and the size of the matching/differing sections. BTW, the mass-extraction with 7-zip of DLLs etc from the CAB files in .iso images or on CDs, indicated above, could perhaps be used to build a huge archive/repository of various versions of MS etc. DLLs. I still have among the stuff I got from a garage sale, for about $10, a binder filled with maybe 100 MS Technet Plus subscription CDs, Sept.1999 to July 2000, from a guy who was a MS certified something until the bust of the internet boom, and who then became a real estate agent, until the bust of the real estate boom. Would this be just a backup of stuff of an age gone by, or could such a pile of various DLL versions still be useful?

Hi duffy98,There are issues with Win98 and hotspots and WLAN. I have the additional problem that I have assigned fixed IPs to the WLAN cards in my desktops and laptops, and hotspots seem to require an automatic assignment of IP numbers to the WLAN card. With fixed IPs I can have shortcuts on the computer screen on all computers in the network, eMule etc requires the opening of ports on specific IPs, I have installed an HP2605n Color LaseJet network printer attached to my WLAN router via a fixed IP, and everything works fine for me with fixed IPs under both Win98SE and WinXP. I am currently thinking about setting up a network scanner. I understand nothing about networks. Wireless routers and and wireless networks are my bogeyman and cause horror in me. Whenever there is a wireless issue I get into a bad mood. When I stay at a hotel, I take a long Ethernet cable with me and go with my old laptop to the computer room to connect to the internet, via cable. 3 wireless routers have died on me during the past 4 years, their quality was just not made for continuous usage. When I was in Europe for several months, my 17-year-old called me in the middle of the night from the US: "The [wireless] router doesn't work anymore, I have to do some work for school on the internet and use the printer [connected to the wireless network]." The solution was to go to the public library and use the computer, internet and printer there, for a month until I came back. Maybe routers die when there is an automatic firmware update, with who knows what is added. I don't like government spyware, I have recently read that US spy agencies have spyware even built into the firmware of refrigerators, and a few days ago the driver on a highway was stopped by police equipped with special gear measuring the radioactivity of passing cars; the guy, a fireman, had just received a radioactive diagnostic injection for a heart problem. Big Brother is watching everywhere. The last wireless router died on me about a month ago, and I am currently using an ancient spare router, with no wireless part, where the firmware can probably not be updated automatically (the firmware version still displays Dec.2005), and with lots of long Ethernet cables to trip over. I'll never touch wireless Netgear routers again, any suggestions for a top-quality wireless router, which was not designed in the US [the label "designed in US" might perhaps be misinterpreted, in a fit of paranoia, to mean "designed to the specifications of FBxI, CIxA, NSxA & Co] ? Cloning a HDD is so much faster than re-installing operating systems and applications on several computers. Also, to support 3 laptops with different configurations and installations is already quite some task. The comment at the bottom of posting #11 might be interesting. With your approach you may have to activate for example your virus scanning software several times.

Interesting to know, drive letters are the scarcest resource on my computer, under WinXP even more so than under Win98SE, because Win98SE doesn't assign drive letters to NTFS partitions. I have both under Win98 and under WinXP 2 virtual drives, V: and W:, (V: is Alcohol, W: is UltraISO) so that I can compare the content of 2 mounted .iso/.nrg/.img/.bin etc. files with Beyond Compare, with 2 different virtual drive programs. I am not yet into Linux http://pwet.fr/man/linux/administration_systeme/isoinfo I assume that your mentioning of isoinfo implies that there is no utility under Windows which can search .iso files in a folder. If jaclaz can't find it, it probably doesn't exist Manually indexing 100+ iso files, and then searching the combined index, implies that this index has to be constantly updated for new .isos. So just having a 192GB partition on an external HDD with the extracted isos, and searching this EXTRACTED partition with Win98 Find still looks like the easiest approach to find stuff in my .isos, and also serves as an additional backup.

Hi bphlpt,I disagree with you for philosophical reasons. For me there are many roads which lead to Rome, so I haven't given up yet. 1. Test with Advanced CAB Repair v1.2: - I extracted all files from the bad .iso into a folder. The bad .iso contains about 130 corrupt files with zeroed-out "holes" in them - I renamed about 4500 files in this folder from*.??_ to *.CAB (e.g. .EX_, .DL_, .IN_). Advanced CAB Repair v1.2 only works on files with the .CAB extension - I made a Batch Repair of these 4500 CAB files - unfortunately, Advance CAB Repair repaired all except 2 .CAB files (the good ones and the corrupt ones), and did not display a message which CAB files were good, and which ones were bad. The actually corrupt CAB files contained after the repair corrupt DLLs, severely truncated in size. I checked just 1 dll files in a "repaired" cab: the extracted .DLL was 64KB, compared to 1092KB of the DLL extracted from a corresponding good CAB file. Advanced CAB Repair could neither flag corrupt CAB files, nor repair corrupt CAB files in this test, although MiTeC Explorer did display several tabs for the truncated DLL extracted from the corrupt/repairedCAB. 2. Test with 7-Zip: - I extracted again all files from the mounted bad .iso into a folder - without renaming any files I selected everything in that folder and had 7-Zip extract everything to another folder. Files which were not archives (e.g. boot.bmp) were displayed in the message window as "Can not open file xxx as archive". And here the amazing result of this experiment: - the corrupt CAB files were displayed in the message window like: K:\junk\I386\TRACERT6.EX_ Data error in 'tracert6.exe'. File is broken 7-Zip can apparently identify all broken CAB files and many other broken archive files in a .iso (.CH_, .DL_, .EX_, .JP_, .. TS_, .TT_, ., .EN_, .FR, .IT_, .CAB, .EXE, .CHM, etc) You simply have to: 1 - mount the .iso 2 - copy everything from the mounted .iso on the virtual drive to an empty folder 3 - select everything in this folder -> right-click and drag to another empty folder -> select 7-Zip -> select Extract Here The extraction may take 2-3 minutes. If no msg "File is broken" is displayed in the 7-Zip message window, the .iso contains no broken archives and the .iso is most likely Ok If there are broken archives in the .iso, 7-Zip will display them with the message "File is broken" Such isos have to be re-created, from the original bad CD. I have just tested in the manner described above a reconstructed .iso, which I had created from a really badly damaged CD. 7-Zip did not detect any broken archives in the .iso, so the recovery of this bad CD seems to have been successful. I am quite optimistic that there is a way to quickly identify corrupt DLLs, and hope that somebody else will pick up from here.