Why create an iso image rather than copy data files?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by avphan@jhexidecimalnospam.com, Jul 13, 2007.

  1. Guest

    I've been reading the Imgburn tutorials and checking iso freeware, but what
    I can't seem to determine is why some feel that they should create an iso
    image file to disk of the material they wish to copy to CD-r or DVD, rather
    than just copy the files directly.

    Some say it's to always have a backup of a certain group of files, but if
    that's the case, can't you just copy the DVD or CD of the same data files?
    The same goes for the DVD video directory files.

    One article I recently read stated that an ISO file will always keep a
    group of files together so that if you need to edit or add one, you can
    extract the ISO, add it, and create a news ISO. Well, can't the same thing
    be done if you copy the files into a directory and burn that directory to a
    disk?


    One reason I can think of is that since an iso file contains it's own OS so
    to speak, you might get a cleaner burn than just burning the data files
    straight to disk from your hard drive. Another possibility is that it
    might be faster and cause less wear and tear on the DVD drive.





    Would someone like to explain the reasons for using an image file that's
    more sound? Should ISO's be saved as backups on CD's or DVD's?


    Secondly, when does bin files come into play here?
     
    , Jul 13, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. pcbutts1 Guest

    ..iso is not a format, it's a container that holds the formatted files.
    A DVD of copied files is composed of separate files. The ISO version of the
    same files is just a single file.

    The ISO image file preserves an exact copy of the files, including the
    structure, along with the data needed to make an exact copy. The burning
    software doesn't have to interpret the file and it can't change it. BIN/CUE
    files for making CDs are also image files.

    More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_image



    --

    Newsgroup Trolls. Read about mine here http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads
    The list grows. Leythos the stalker http://www.leythosthestalker.com, David
    H. Lipman, Max M Wachtell III aka What's in a Name?, Fitz,
    Rhonda Lea Kirk, Meat Plow, F Kwatu F, George Orwell



    <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > I've been reading the Imgburn tutorials and checking iso freeware, but
    > what
    > I can't seem to determine is why some feel that they should create an iso
    > image file to disk of the material they wish to copy to CD-r or DVD,
    > rather
    > than just copy the files directly.
    >
    > Some say it's to always have a backup of a certain group of files, but if
    > that's the case, can't you just copy the DVD or CD of the same data files?
    > The same goes for the DVD video directory files.
    >
    > One article I recently read stated that an ISO file will always keep a
    > group of files together so that if you need to edit or add one, you can
    > extract the ISO, add it, and create a news ISO. Well, can't the same
    > thing
    > be done if you copy the files into a directory and burn that directory to
    > a
    > disk?
    >
    >
    > One reason I can think of is that since an iso file contains it's own OS
    > so
    > to speak, you might get a cleaner burn than just burning the data files
    > straight to disk from your hard drive. Another possibility is that it
    > might be faster and cause less wear and tear on the DVD drive.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Would someone like to explain the reasons for using an image file that's
    > more sound? Should ISO's be saved as backups on CD's or DVD's?
    >
    >
    > Secondly, when does bin files come into play here?
     
    pcbutts1, Jul 13, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lord Possum Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    > I've been reading the Imgburn tutorials and checking iso freeware, but what
    > I can't seem to determine is why some feel that they should create an iso
    > image file to disk of the material they wish to copy to CD-r or DVD, rather
    > than just copy the files directly.


    [snip-a-lot]
    ===================================

    I see your point, and agree ... to a point. But, my own reason for
    liking ISO files is for speed of transfer to other locations as compared
    to individual file transfers. We have programs to view and treat ISO
    files as virtual drives, and able to extract what we want any time.
    I make ISO files of entire harddrives, or of floppy disks ... that's one
    type of ISO. But, using FOLDER2ISO, I can archive a discrete package of
    things for rapid transfer in a mere fraction of the time is would take
    to file copy.

    Lord Possum
     
    Lord Possum, Jul 13, 2007
    #3
  4. thanatoid Guest

    wrote in
    news:p:

    > I've been reading the Imgburn tutorials and checking iso
    > freeware, but what I can't seem to determine is why some
    > feel that they should create an iso image file to disk of
    > the material they wish to copy to CD-r or DVD, rather than
    > just copy the files directly.
    >
    > Some say it's to always have a backup of a certain group of
    > files, but if that's the case, can't you just copy the DVD
    > or CD of the same data files? The same goes for the DVD
    > video directory files.
    >
    > One article I recently read stated that an ISO file will
    > always keep a group of files together so that if you need
    > to edit or add one, you can extract the ISO, add it, and
    > create a news ISO. Well, can't the same thing be done if
    > you copy the files into a directory and burn that directory
    > to a disk?
    >
    > One reason I can think of is that since an iso file
    > contains it's own OS so to speak, you might get a cleaner
    > burn than just burning the data files straight to disk from
    > your hard drive. Another possibility is that it might be
    > faster and cause less wear and tear on the DVD drive.


    An ISO file should be created on a *defragged* partition rather
    than burning files directly onto the disc because it is a safer
    and less complicated way to do it. When you burn an ISO file to
    a disc what you will get is all the directories and files you
    have chosen to burn - the ISO file is purely an intermediate
    step performed to keep things as kosher as possible.

    It is also suggested that NOTHING be done on the computer (I
    don't care how fast it is and how many GB's of RAM you have)
    while the ISO creation and disc burning are happening, and that
    burning at slower speeds (I burn at 8x) creates a CD that, while
    perhaps virtually the same as something burned at 52x, will be
    read by many more CD drives and standalone players than the 2-
    minute wonder. Also, do not buy cheap media.

    You could of course, copy the ISO file AS A FILE to the disc,
    but the ISO file is slightly larger and it makes no sense
    really.

    If you are concerned about backups, burn 2 copies and store the
    other one in another location.

    For more info, www.cdrfaq.org


    --
    Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to
    reality.
     
    thanatoid, Jul 13, 2007
    #4
  5. Troppo Guest

    wrote in
    news:p:

    > I've been reading the Imgburn tutorials and checking iso freeware, but
    > what I can't seem to determine is why some feel that they should
    > create an iso image file to disk of the material they wish to copy to
    > CD-r or DVD, rather than just copy the files directly.
    >
    > snip
    >


    If you intend to make numerous copies of a DVD over a period of time its
    much faster (eg half the time) to burn from an ISO.
     
    Troppo, Jul 13, 2007
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ted Jones
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,013
    Dennis Willson
    Nov 4, 2005
  2. ~The Kid~
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    479
    This is Rip Off UK
    Oct 13, 2003
  3. Georgette Preddy

    Is Sigma's SD10 at ISO 1600 better than Canon's 1Ds at ISO 100?

    Georgette Preddy, Jul 11, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    715
    Randall Ainsworth
    Jul 15, 2004
  4. Replies:
    7
    Views:
    337
    Bill Funk
    Nov 28, 2005
  5. discodave
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    408
    TBone
    Oct 25, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page