Tweet
I have to be honest here, PowerISO may be technically rubbish as the DaemonTools admins say, BUT, they slapped together something that very simply filled a niche in the market : something that was just like an ISO but with compression. And so they deserve all the success that they now have. I read that other formats support compression, MDF/MD5 or something, but
1. MDF/MD5 was not marketed properly (not even CLOSE !)
2. it was not obvious how to create these files to many people (I never knew you could create a compressed MDF/MD5 until I read it here and that was 9 months after PowerISO had already made a name for themselves !).
3. it required 2 files instead of just one like an ISO.
4. by default PowerISO creates compressed images.
5. the same program that creates the DAA images, also mounts the images ...
All of the above sloppiness meant that PowerISO could get in there and make a huge success for themselves.
Moral : if you don't want a young pretender to come along and steal a throne, don't be so sure of yourself, and DON'T ignore the customers. The customers wanted all of the above, and the community IGNORED the customers, so the customers went out and bought PowerISO (forget if it's technically inferior, who cares !, it works, so people like it so buy it and use it)
When PowerISO came out, people should have pulled their damn socks up at MDF/MD5 and other imaging formats and made a good counter to it by showing that better tech was a about with faster/better compression and fully compatible with DaemonTools. but no counter was made except "PowerISO is crap technology". that was it ! Taking the customers seriously would have prevented PowerISO from getting anywhere and given a real boost to the use of MDF/MD5 which probably would have been a standard now if not for the certainty/laziness of the people behind these technologies that PowerISO can't go anywhere. They should have sat up and taken notice and not treated the customers like retards ... but they didn't, so now we are stuck with yet another format we don't need (DAA) when the world + dog could have been using MDF/MD5 right now for compressed ISO's.
Or have I got it all wrong ???
1. MDF/MD5 was not marketed properly (not even CLOSE !)
2. it was not obvious how to create these files to many people (I never knew you could create a compressed MDF/MD5 until I read it here and that was 9 months after PowerISO had already made a name for themselves !).
3. it required 2 files instead of just one like an ISO.
4. by default PowerISO creates compressed images.
5. the same program that creates the DAA images, also mounts the images ...
All of the above sloppiness meant that PowerISO could get in there and make a huge success for themselves.
Moral : if you don't want a young pretender to come along and steal a throne, don't be so sure of yourself, and DON'T ignore the customers. The customers wanted all of the above, and the community IGNORED the customers, so the customers went out and bought PowerISO (forget if it's technically inferior, who cares !, it works, so people like it so buy it and use it)
When PowerISO came out, people should have pulled their damn socks up at MDF/MD5 and other imaging formats and made a good counter to it by showing that better tech was a about with faster/better compression and fully compatible with DaemonTools. but no counter was made except "PowerISO is crap technology". that was it ! Taking the customers seriously would have prevented PowerISO from getting anywhere and given a real boost to the use of MDF/MD5 which probably would have been a standard now if not for the certainty/laziness of the people behind these technologies that PowerISO can't go anywhere. They should have sat up and taken notice and not treated the customers like retards ... but they didn't, so now we are stuck with yet another format we don't need (DAA) when the world + dog could have been using MDF/MD5 right now for compressed ISO's.
Or have I got it all wrong ???