Can't read dvd drive in DOS mode

[jaclaz]

...

MSCDEX has NEVER ONCE failed to work for reading ANY OPTICAL DISC that I have wanted to use.

I see no reason to change it simply based on someone saying "SHSUCDX is better."

...

Good .

But that was three years ago, you have just been told how, besides being "better" , SHSUCDX also uses lots less memory, so you now have TWO reasons to keep nonetheless using MSCDEX.EXE.

jaclaz

[LoneCrusader]

Good .

But that was three years ago, you have just been told how, besides being "better" , SHSUCDX also uses lots less memory, so you now have TWO reasons to keep nonetheless using MSCDEX.EXE.

jaclaz

Yep. And MSCDEX has yet to fail me, so still I plan to keep it.

[DougB]

That is Rule #3 .

Rules of the SHSUCDX club:

#1 You DON'T TALK about the SHSUCDX club.

#2 You DON'T TALK about the SHSUCDX club.

#3 You DON'T TALK about memory footprint!

Ooops.

jaclaz

Then do me this one favor. C'mon... hit me. Before i lose my nerve. Let 'er rip....

Ok, so i can't also mention that although SHCDX33F can be used standalone, it's also integrated and synergistic with that author's CD/DVD driver UDVD2.SYS and his XMS manager XMGR.SYS, all of which take up less memory while having more options than their equivalents and are all in an active state of development? Darn....

To be serious for a moment, i really hope that there hasn't been... and won't be... any kind of war over this issue (i haven't followed this or any similar thread). My feeling is that we're all free to make our own choices, be they data-based, emotion-based, sentimental, aesthetic, political/economic, nihilistic... whatever. After all, on this forum, aren't we all using Win9x, an arguably "outdated" operating system in many opinions, that we struggle to make as useful as possible? Sure, we have our reasons, but in the end, isn't it our choice?

On the other hand, my belief is also that *everything* is always open for debate. Not necessarily to convince any of the posters active in a given thread, but just for the wider dissemination of information and opinion in general. That's one of the ways we learn. And maybe some other person who will read it will get some good info to make a decision on.

- Doug B.

[LoneCrusader]

To be serious for a moment, i really hope that there hasn't been... and won't be... any kind of war over this issue (i haven't followed this or any similar thread).

We're just poking fun at one another.

There was never a "war" over it, but I once took exception to being "encouraged" to use it along with some other tools I did not care for.

My feeling is that we're all free to make our own choices, be they data-based, emotion-based, sentimental, aesthetic, political/economic, nihilistic... whatever. After all, on this forum, aren't we all using Win9x, an arguably "outdated" operating system in many opinions, that we struggle to make as useful as possible? Sure, we have our reasons, but in the end, isn't it our choice?

Agreed 100%.

[dencorso]

My feeling is that we're all free to make our own choices, be they data-based, emotion-based, sentimental, aesthetic, political/economic, nihilistic... whatever. After all, on this forum, aren't we all using Win9x, an arguably "outdated" operating system in many opinions, that we struggle to make as useful as possible? Sure, we have our reasons, but in the end, isn't it our choice?

Agreed 100%.

+1

We're just poking fun at one another.

Of course. In any case, being all 9xers, up to this day and beyond, we're all die-hards by nature, and hence, hardly amenable to be convinced by mere words, ads, fads/fashion and/or peer/social pressures of any kind... and we're all fully aware of that.

[jaclaz]

Actually I would not consider myself a Windows 9x/Me user, though I have used them and like to play with them, I am much more a NT user.

Now, DOS is another thing.

And no, no intentions to start the usual flame war about 9x/Me vs. NT or the more common NTFS vs. FAT32.

jaclaz

[dencorso]

Actually I would not consider myself a Windows 9x/Me user, though I have used them and like to play with them, I am much more a NT user. Now, DOS is another thing.

But, IIRR, your NT of choice is XP SP2 (or have you moved on to SP3 at long last?)... and that qualifies you as a die-hard, too. Of course, being a regular DOS user (true DOS, not a simple DOS box) is also a great die-hard qualification... then again, the whole MSCDEX vs. SHSUCDX matter itself is actually a bona-fide true DOS subject.

[jaclaz]

Actually I would not consider myself a Windows 9x/Me user, though I have used them and like to play with them, I am much more a NT user. Now, DOS is another thing.

But, IIRR, your NT of choice is XP SP2 (or have you moved on to SP3 at long last?)... and that qualifies you as a die-hard, too. Of course, being a regular DOS user (true DOS, not a simple DOS box) is also a great die-hard qualification... then again, the whole MSCDEX vs. SHSUCDX matter itself is actually a bona-fide true DOS subject.

Well actually I still have machines running NT 4.00, 2K and the XP (SP2, you are right) I normally use is due to a couple of softwares that I cannot really run on 2K.

I expect to be qualified as die-harder.

jaclaz

[LoneCrusader]

...

I expect to be qualified as die-harder.

...

Now we can have a war about who is "die-hardest!"

[jaclaz]

Now we can have a war about who is "die-hardest!"

For no apparent reason :

jaclaz