>I also use ImgBurn, but only up to 4.7gb DVDs. Most likely it is not
>the burner but what feeds the burner. Using 3.2GHz AMD quadcore with
>16gb RAM. Usually 14gb available RAM.
>
>ImgBurn has a large data buffer that feeds the burner data buffer and
>when some other backround program grabs computer time, ImgBurn handles
>the data delay.
>
>What I am trying to say is, for instance, feeding the Blu-ray from a
>slow USB 2.0 external drive may never work. But there is some
>cobination of lots of RAM and high speed feeder drives that will work.
>
>ImgBurn seems to work well with buffer under-runs, where the burner
>wants data and can not get it fast enough. The burner wants to keep
>writing data on the current track and will fail if it does not have
>the data ready.
===================================================
Nero has buffer under-run protection and other built in protection
against burning coasters as well.
I will try this 'ImgBurn' that you and RIB have mentioned and see if I
get coaster #6.
It might probably be that my system just can't handle burning 25GB
Blu-Ray.
My motherboard max's out at 8GB RAM (6GB fitted)... probably time for
a new desktop (which I can't afford) :)
Thanks for the input though :)
*******************************************************
* If The Earth Didn't Suck... We Would All Fall Off ! *
*******************************************************
|--Spike=-
|
|