The site has undergone a much needed facelift.

Also, over the past couple of months some minor changes have been introduced. You can now edit your submitted drives read features and you can now include the drives write offset.

--
daefeatures.co.uk

After introducing the phorums news portal to the website main page, users were no longer able to edit their own drive features (damn registered_globals are turned on on the server) under certain conditions. Anyone that logged in from index.php would have seen 4 drives that were not their own when they came to the edit drive details page.

This issue has now been resolved. Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks to Thundik81 for reporting.

--
daefeatures.co.uk

Fantastic site ! I will support this project and hint at it in other forums.

But just a few suggestions:

- A 'HTOA'-search-function
- A 'Type'-search-function
- an additional column quoting wether drive XY uses SCSI or IDE inclusively the appropriate search-function for that
- EAC-cache-detection is inaccurate and sometimes leads to variing results for the same drive. A small guide telling
users how to do Feuro's cache-test and where to get all necessary files for that would be a good idea.

Good luck and exponentially increasing name recognition for the furure, daefeature.co.uk

Thanks for your kind words.

The two search types are on the todo list.

I'll have to consider the SCSI thing. I'm not so sure whether or not this affects a drive performance and this is what this database is all about? If I was to add SCSI I'd have to also consider USB, Firewire, SATA and SATA2 as other optional fields. Also, this maybe heading into too complicated territory and I always wanted to keep this a straight forward database. Your suggestion is appreciated and I'll have a ponder over this. Anyone else have any thoughts?

The cache detection suggestions are good and I'll work on introducing those with the other updates I've in mind.

--
daefeatures.co.uk

Paul Wrote:
> I'll have to consider the SCSI thing. I'm not so
> sure whether or not this affects a drive
> performance and this is what this database is all
> about? If I was to add SCSI I'd have to also
> consider USB, Firewire, SATA and SATA2 as other
> optional fields. Also, this maybe heading into too
> complicated territory and I always wanted to keep
> this a straight forward database. Your suggestion
> is appreciated and I'll have a ponder over this.
> Anyone else have any thoughts?

My understand is that there might be some limits on CDB size over ATAPI vs. SCSI. Might be useful to know if certain tools turn out to work better with one type of drive vs. the other.

-brendan