AtariZoll wrote:There is lot of nonsense, lack of logic in what dlfrsilver says - that's why I wrote what wrote. There is no flaming, just writing own experiences.
I'm paid in IT for my logic precisely. And I have been in the past directing more than 40 engineers in a big bank. Engineers way more competant than you actually are
Guys paid 6-7000 euros per month
And i was respected by them. So you're so called experience has a name : "bullshit !".
You're basically an individual specialised in cracking and patching, but also an expert at quarrelling other people, i'd even say better than some women ahaha
So please, do us a favor, keep the good work on your cracks and patchs, and for the remaining, just shut the *uc* up !
For instance: "Preservation means the exact untouched data lifted up from the original. Everything else is bullshit." - by this, IPF is bullshit too.
The IPF is the exact representation of what was on an original disk. You say i know nothing ? "YOU know notin' Jon Snow !"
That's the first reason why you'll never be a part of SPS, never and ever. We don't need idiots like you with us, better shot a bullet in our own leg !
Because only RAW images are (near to) exact untouched data. What is difference between some repacked release and original ? Nothing in fact, because data is not touched.
We are only preserving ORIGINAL disks, we don't preserve cracks, copies, disk images and so on !
The explanation is simple : in regard of the law, pirated softwares (read deprotected, filed, trained and so on), just can't be used for preservation.
Do the Louvres Museum stores a fake copy of the joconda painting and calls it preservation ? NOPE.
They store the original painting. Nothing else.
For softwares, it's the same. No legal holders would agree that pirated, transformed or trained versions of the assets can be called preservation !
Preservation means original software coming from original disks, with original copy protections, untampered, this up to the flux signal form !
Only container of data is changed. Same can be said for some hard disk adaptation - at the end all bytes used by SW, game will be exactly same. IPF is not exact image of original, only presentation of it. Furthermore, an image is not exact untouched data. Only accurate physical copy of floppy is exact data - here mean all fluxes, protection tricks and so on. Every image is just close to original.
Once again you just didn't apprehend or understood what preservation is.
you are extracting the datas from the disk, changing the number of sectors for storage, you modify heavily the programs, in order to patch.
That's no more the original program like it has been trademarked and law protected. The name is known, it's pirated copies.
Nothing more, nothing else.
All in all, we discuss in fact what way of closing to original is best.
We know already what it is and we don't need your babbling to determine what, how and where things must be done.
And that's actually matter of taste, experience, and no thanx SPS, you will not tell me what is preservation, because you are one sided.
Preservation in term of conservation has only one definition, and it's ours, not yours.
Plus, serious organization would never engage someone without basic knowledge, like our drfr ...
Third point for which you will never be part of SPS : I have of course the basic knowledge, and more.
There's no need to be a programmer (even worse : a moronic pirate
) to be able to preserve softwares.
The proof : i'm processing a lot of IPFs for our contributors WITHOUT having any need to ask you babbling like you do usually
Oh my godddd. And the worse : the IPFs i'm creating are perfectly working. Please don't fall down nor do an heart attack please ahaha
Preservation is to faithfully keep user content of some SW, game.
Ok, so tomorrow i go painting a fake Joconda, and i go to the louvres museum claiming that's preservation, because that's the joconda.
Stop being silly and empty-minded like that. You perfectly know that you're wrong at best.
Protections are not it. Of course, if someone wants to preserve copy protections, it is his right. Normal people will not care about it, and certainly in future will not judge some SW by how it was copyprotected, but how well it is playable and such things. In other words, preserving copy protection is preservation of specific release, not SW self.
The protections have been applied by the legal owner of the concerned software. Without the protection, the software is then tampered, and cannot be anymore preserved, because that's not how it was intended by his creator(s).
Having a copy of a software is simply : pratical AND easy to transfer. But things stops here.
I have 2 originals of Carrier Command - first release is not copyprotected, just manual protection. Other is with Copylock. But that's 100% same game.
Yes and what is the problem then ? You own 2 differents revisions of this software, what is the actual problem ?
I could be now unfair, as some here used to, and say that KryoFlux is bullshit, because can not copy manuals, so is not good for copy protected SW - and manual is part of release. All in all, good is what is good for end users.
Oh my god, stop drinking Vodka or any strong alcohol passing nearby your hands, the carrier command manual is already available on the net !
There are many websites for that, you don't know how to use google ?