Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
What is the currently best Desktop Search software?
4wd:
.... like burning a CD or DVD - I had to end Copernic's process because it would steal so much CPU and cause burns to fail.-J-Mac (November 27, 2008, 02:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
You either have an extremely old burner or have disabled whatever burn-interruption-protection-mechanism it uses - I've never had a burn fail because the CPU suddenly didn't have enough time to do it.
I've had ImgBurn sitting in the middle of a burn waiting for 15 minutes so that HDD load, (was transferring files at the same time), could reduce enough to let the buffers fill - the burn finished and the disc was OK.
f0dder:
Hm, I doubt CPU strain would be very high from file indexing (unless something is very wrong with the indexing application), and CD burning doesn't require a lot of CPU power anyway... but indexing of course has a lot of disk load (why oh why wasn't I/O prioritization added before Vista?).
BurnProof/whatever-each-vendor-calls-it does save you from coasters, but it's still best not to rely on it - burn quality is lower if BurnProof has to kick in.
Ralf Maximus:
I've always wondered... what the heck *is* BurnProof?
f0dder:
I've always wondered... what the heck *is* BurnProof?-Ralf Maximus (November 27, 2008, 06:32 PM)
--- End quote ---
The ability to stop the burning process and resume it, with the laser position within... oh, some hundred nanometres (iirc) of the last burn position, as specified by the CD/DVD specs. Apparently that's a non-trivial task?, since it was added quite some years after burners became mainstream.
Armando:
Hm, I doubt CPU strain would be very high from file indexing (unless something is very wrong with the indexing application)
-f0dder (November 27, 2008, 05:56 PM)
--- End quote ---
Archivarius doesn't strain the CPU too much (yes, there'S a lot of HD activity...) but X1 does. And does it in a very irritating way. The textextractor process -- in particular -- is fairly voracious.
(why oh why wasn't I/O prioritization added before Vista?).
-f0dder (November 27, 2008, 05:56 PM)
--- End quote ---
I'm learning something. I didn't know that Vista had I/O prioritization.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version