Huge -> literally nothing will change, even for die-hard half life fans.
TLDR: a guy who beta tested Half-Life found a CD of said beta
And might be sued by Valve shortly
I’m guessing he signed an NDA so I’m not sure what he was thinking distributing it so publicly.
Do NDAs last for 25 years or something?
NDA was the wrong term to use there but I’m sure there was a “don’t give the game to anyone” in there they might be enforceable. I hope they don’t sue, though
“ “ - Gordon Freeman (New dialogue found on beta disc)
Jessup managed to burn the intact Half-Life CD
What?
“Burning” a CD means copying it. Idk why. I used to have someone in my family who would burn movies for everyone so we didn’t have to pay to rent or own.
Am i this old now 😂
What I ment was that bruning a disc is the secondary step to making a copy if a disc, you first need to rip the original disc into an ISO file.
I remember when we got our first CD burner, it was a black and copper colored Philips unit, it was back when you made sure to leave the computer alone when burning a CD because you you didn’t want to risk buffer underrun.
not if you had one of those setups where you can burn right from a source CD to multiple target blanks
But the way the sentence is structured is saying that burning happened to the OG disc. Burning is what happens to the copy disc.
Did you want the person to detail every step they took?
No, but the verbage is still incorrect for what they were doing. The correct way wouldn’t be that much more words, just different words.
It is sort of surreal to see someone so young they don’t know what burning a CD is in an article about a game older than CD burners.
Just a small correction (that makes things worse):
It is sort of surreal to see someone so young they don’t know what burning a CD is writing an article about a game older than CD burners.
The person asking the question here is correct, the phrase in the article makes no sense, and it’s likely written by someone who heard the lingo “burn” in reference to discs but it’s too young to have use it themselves (otherwise they would have said they ripped the intact CD, or they burned copies of it)
Burning is writing a disc. Ripping is extracting data from a disc. Whoever wrote the article used lingo they don’t understand.
That is what I thought, I have burned many discs in my day, and I have never got an ISO from bruning a disc.
I knew it had to do with putting data on a disc. I didn’t know the specifics.
I haven’t thought about burning CDs in a long time, man that takes me back. Remember Nero Burning ROM?
I think the etymology of the term is that when you’re writing data onto a disk you’re shooting a laser onto it to alter the chemistry and change its color, for which “burning” the data into it makes sense.
It wasn’t the colour, you would burn little bubbles into the disk. The bubbles would deflect a laser and flat parts would not. This would give the 0 or 1 bits.
There were CD- and CD+ versions. I don’t know which is which but one would create a divot, and the other would create a bubble. Either way the laser is diverted away from the sensor.
Ah, that’s what it was! I always thought it was just a different color for 0 and 1, today I learned! That makes more sense when I think about it.
CD - red laser
BlueRay - blue laser… shorter wavelength --> more data on same size disk
and inbetween there was DL - dual layer
light scribe - could etch a picture on the top of the cd
and RW - rewriteable CDs(CD is short for compact disc)
Burning was originally used in the sense that to write to a disc you used the laser to “burn” in your data, at least irrc. It just started to be used interchangeably for copy and write operations. These days I think “rip” makes more sense.
