Discferret broken? - test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

7 Mar 2012

Hi Brian,
...
    * I do cost reduce solutions.  However, I feel
designs should "do no
      harm".  In other words, the cost reduction might create units that
      do not function, but they should never adversely affect the target
      vintage equipment. I can assure you that our choice of parts does not harm
anything. Unless 
you actively want to
damage the unit (try hot plugging the drive; I still do this all the 
time), I don't see an issue here.

Ask ten architects about how to build a house and I am sure you will get 
varying results.

I would really like to avoid the impression something is broken. It's 
not, it's working.

...
     * As a fellow enthusiast, I share David's
concern over the closed and
      guarded nature of the KryoFlux Analyzer.  I don't buy the arguments
      in the FAQ.  I see no issue with letting anyone creating IPFs, as I
      feel the community will self select the people who do it well.  As
      well, it's been my experience that there are lots of very
      intelligent people in this community, and one delude themselves
      thinking a "complex" solution is not useful to others without
      extensive training/education. We have two separate products for this, one is
KryoFlux with DTC (the 
disk tool console) that
will completely satisfy many private users. The other is our Analyser 
that will aid a preservationist
to verify authenticity and integrity of data ingested. This is aimed at 
institutions. We might change
that in the future due to many requests, however, we still have to 
figure out to make sure it's
understood as an IDE and that you need to understand how disk coding 
works, otherwise it's
useless. Someone not familiar with C++ also won't have much fun with an 
IDE for that.

If you would have to handle all the feedback and questions, you might 
see this in a different light.
It helps discouraging those that have no serious interest, users that 
really want it usually just contact
us and we arrange for something.

As a side note: Everyone is free to come up with their own format or do 
their own Analyser,
no one is forced buying into our solution.

...
     * I disagree with Christian's "audit"
response.  I don't think the OP
      was lamenting the fact that he/she could not audit the source, but
      that a closed source product can never be truly "audited", as the
      author can always doctor the version provided for audit.  And, even
      if I am wrong and it can, it creates a perception problem. I can't argue
against that. However, it would require criminal energy to 
pimp or change a
version meant for audit. And I don't see why we'd break something in the 
official version
that would only work in the audit version.

...
     * The legal concerns about "conflict of
interest" do concern me.
      There are precious few people in this area of expertise, I think
      it's the responsibility of hardware and software vendors to ensure
      such a product or offering does not fragment the group.  Christian's
      response did not clear things up.  I don't understand how "

      What I find interesting is that several of my UK, European and Japanese
      contacts (at various computer museums in those countries) were scared
      off of working with the DiscFerret. Nearly every one of them cited the
      same reason: "conflicts of interest" between assisting with DiscFerret
      and using commercial versions of the Kryoflux analysis software (which I
      suspect would be CTA or a variant thereof).

      " would get one "thrown out of the 'house'".  While it's
an unsavory
      topic, it's one that demands some type of response.  If someone said
      that to me, I believe I would send a note to the individual and
      request he/she forward it on, assuring them that they can work on
      both projects without fear of litigation. There's nothing to clear up, and
it does not demand a response. I am not 
aware of any issues,
except what I heard via a mailing list from a competitive developer. To 
me this is not a trusted
source of information. I am in contact with our customers directly. As I 
said in another reply:
There is no NDA involved, no contract, nothing. If someone is scared 
working with a
competitive product that maybe has to do with the quality of the product 
or the demeanour of
the person representing it.

If I was to damage a project's reputation in public, such created 
scenario would for sure fit pretty well.

...
     * I agree that you're paying someone not to
develop a solution, but to
      *NOT*  do something else.  I'm a good example.  I give up weeknights
      and weekends to develop products because I get paid to do so.  I
      could enjoy another hobby if I was so inclined. That's very well worded
and hits the nail on the head. It happens that 
our "hobby", preserving software,
is very costly because it's hard to find a game (or application) in good 
shape for a decent price these
days.