VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 28 of 28
Thread
  1. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    I just bought my first bluray writer and it can do m discs. Are these worth it? And do they only come in dvdr? Are there bluray m discs?

    My burner is:

    BH16NS40

    LG ELECTRONICS USA, INC. - 16x Internal Blu-Ray Disc Double-Layer DVD±RW/CD-RW Drive

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/16x-internal-blu-ray-disc-double-layer-dvd-177rw-cd-rw-dri...uray&cp=1&lp=1

    Thanks.

    edit - sample of m disc:

    http://www.amazon.com/M-DISC-DVD-Cake-Box-Pack/dp/B005Y4NKE0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=13...eywords=m+disc
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member racer-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Search Comp PM
    Bought my LG blu-ray burner 5+ years ago, never heard of M Disks. My 10+ year-old dvd+r disks play just fine as well as dvd-r disks, so don't know what the concern is..........

    For blu-ray blank media, I've had good luck with VinPower (cheap NewEgg Brand) disks...........
    Got my retirement plans all set. Looks like I only have to work another 5 years after I die........
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by racer-x
    so don't know what the concern is..........
    I'm considering it for harddrive backups. I'd like to make a set for my computers that are more invulnerable. I know it's best to keep updating anyway and i do have them on usb drives but still.

    Originally Posted by racer-x
    Bought my LG blu-ray burner 5+ years ago
    That's probably when I bought my lg rom bluray drive. This is my first bluray burner.

    Originally Posted by racer-x
    never heard of M Disks.
    Check the amazon link in my first post.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    lordsmurf is apparently testing the DVD version.
    http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/media/4081-disc-blank-dvd.html

    I bought Panasonic BD-R media for backing up my recorded TV shows. At about $75 for 50 discs from some stores on Amazon, they are half the price of m disc DVDs, and did much better than Verbatim BD-R HTL media in a French study where the testers baked the discs for an extended period at 80 degrees Celsius and 80% relative humidity. See http://club.myce.com/f33/french-study-bd-r-archival-329441/
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 15th Mar 2014 at 15:06.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member racer-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Search Comp PM
    Ya, I did look at that link. Like I said, don't know what the concern is, as I've never had a disk fail. If it makes you feel better to purchase those disks, then by all means do............
    Got my retirement plans all set. Looks like I only have to work another 5 years after I die........
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet
    m disc BD-Rs,
    Ok so they do make bdr m discs, good to know.

    Originally Posted by usually_quiet
    lordsmurf is apparently testing the DVD version.
    http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/media/4081-disc-blank-dvd.html
    I'll be sure to check that out.

    Originally Posted by usually_quiet
    I bought Panasonic BD-R media for backingup my recorded TV shows. At $75 for 50 discs from some stores on Amazon, they are half the price of m disc BD-Rs, and did much better than Verbatim BD-R HTL media in a French study where the testers baked the discs for an extended period at 80 degrees Celsius and 80% relative humidity. See http://club.myce.com/f33/french-study-bd-r-archival-329441/
    Hmm I thought verbatim were best.

    I bought memorex single layer bd-rs today to get started. They show up as ritek but this is my test batch.

    I'll keep those in mind.

    Thanks.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  7. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    I have no idea nor do I know anyone who has used them, but this guy at ZDnet put them through an interesting torture test and came out impressed.

    http://www.zdnet.com/torture-testing-the-1000-year-dvd-7000023203/

    Do note that the article states that the company that makes them admits the possibility that some drives may not play them, but most probably will.

    There are BluRay m-discs according to Wikipedia.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet
    m disc BD-Rs,
    I typed BD-Rs by mistake, and later changed my post to say DVDs.

    Verbatim media burns with few coasters, but Panasonic media not only burns well (so far), but also withstands artificial aging tests quite well.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member turk690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    ON, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    I have an LG BH14NS40 and will try an M-disc BD-R soon.
    I can see that the fundamental difference with conventional optical media and M discs is that the former is purely optical, i.e. the laser merely "burns" (darkens) areas in the dye, whereas the latter actually gouges out pits in it. Isn't this in fact similar to how conventional pressed optical media are?
    Does this imply it's more meaningful to compare performance and longevity with pressed optical media than with conventional recordable optical media?
    For the nth time, with the possible exception of certain Intel processors, I don't have/ever owned anything whose name starts with "i".
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    I'm considering it for harddrive backups. I'd like to make a set for my computers that are more invulnerable. I know it's best to keep updating anyway and i do have them on usb drives but still.
    The best medium for storing hard drive backups is probably another hard drive and they're way cheaper per GB.
    I gave up burning discs a couple of years ago. I used to burn everything to DVD discs as backups, then to Bluray discs...... until eventually I bought another set of hard drives for backups. I now have all my data stored on two hard drives. Burning discs is way too slow.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    Hello, there's another thread about "successor to BluRay Disks" and I've been wondering, "What will be the too-long-of-burn time for users?"

    Ignoring the reliability of BDs vs DVDs (let's assume they're comparable for this hypothetical situation), you spent years and hours (hundreds? more?) burning to DVD but apparently BluRay Burn Time (holding 4-5 times as much data) has violated your Willingness To Endure. Your "patience level", so to speak.

    (It certain presses on mine, too. Like you, "Multiple HDDs" seems far more sensible, cost-effective, etc etc.)

    Alas, it's really tough to take an HDD over to a pal's house and say, "Ya just gotta see THIS movie - it's terrific - I even brought popcorn."

    And no shoehorn or ballpeen hammer crams that HDD into his $25 Coby DVD player! Rats!

    So "proper video media" still has a place.

    Yet you've brought up this "violating a patience" issue well, and I agree. I just wonder - if BluRay's successor holds 4 or more times the data - let's say that 2-hour long movie is REALLY sharp in 4K or 8K - will you consider a 4-or-10 hour Burn Time for a 2-hour video?

    Would you consider a 2-hour burn cycle - essentially one-minute of burn for one-minute of video?

    I'm not sure I would. Maybe I'll need to find a better shoehorn and bigger hammer.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    Hard discs are also a single point of failure. Of course if you have backups that's better, but that reduces the cost effectiveness quite a bit. Sure you can go the RAID route, but it is possible for 2 drives to fail at the same time and if your setup can't handle that, you're screwed. It may not be likely but I did read about a guy at home who had it happen to him. He posted it as a cautionary tale.
    Quote Quote  
  13. a burn that takes 10 days, now thats a sick burn
    Status - Attacked by mold spores. - Pour out a lil liquor for all the homies lost in the format wars. Sanlyn will live again, a Sanlyn v2.0 if you will
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    If after 500 years one of these discs die, I will be very upset.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    Puzz, that might be the drive. You might want to buy a spare unit every 200 years or so, just in case. That's my plan.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    everything everyone has ever put on recordable media is of the utmost importance in the next 1000 years so lets start a media campaign to make sure that they'll still be m disc capable drives in the next 1000 years....oh wait....who gives a damn
    Quote Quote  
  17. im backing up my collection of davey, who's still in the navy and probably will be for life
    Status - Attacked by mold spores. - Pour out a lil liquor for all the homies lost in the format wars. Sanlyn will live again, a Sanlyn v2.0 if you will
    Quote Quote  
  18. Originally Posted by OllieTSB View Post
    Hello, there's another thread about "successor to BluRay Disks" and I've been wondering, "What will be the too-long-of-burn time for users?"

    Ignoring the reliability of BDs vs DVDs (let's assume they're comparable for this hypothetical situation), you spent years and hours (hundreds? more?) burning to DVD but apparently BluRay Burn Time (holding 4-5 times as much data) has violated your Willingness To Endure. Your "patience level", so to speak.

    (It certain presses on mine, too. Like you, "Multiple HDDs" seems far more sensible, cost-effective, etc etc.)

    Alas, it's really tough to take an HDD over to a pal's house and say, "Ya just gotta see THIS movie - it's terrific - I even brought popcorn."

    And no shoehorn or ballpeen hammer crams that HDD into his $25 Coby DVD player! Rats!

    So "proper video media" still has a place.

    Yet you've brought up this "violating a patience" issue well, and I agree. I just wonder - if BluRay's successor holds 4 or more times the data - let's say that 2-hour long movie is REALLY sharp in 4K or 8K - will you consider a 4-or-10 hour Burn Time for a 2-hour video?

    Would you consider a 2-hour burn cycle - essentially one-minute of burn for one-minute of video?

    I'm not sure I would. Maybe I'll need to find a better shoehorn and bigger hammer.
    I'm not sure which side you're arguing, if there is one, but burning is way slower than saving to a hard drive. No matter how much the disc holds. Plus discs aren't as efficient. How many times have you completely filled a DVD or Bluray disc and not wasted a few hundred MBs or more?
    Not to mention the fact I've never saved a file to a hard drive and had to worry about the saved file being readable (except in the case of a faulty hard drive which was replaced). If you're anal about backing up like I am there's not just the burning time, there's the time it takes to either verify the disc is readable or run a quality scan. I used to reject burns below a certain quality to ensure the disc would be readable in the future. Even using good quality blanks and a good quality burner I'd reject at least one burn in ten. The low quality discs were generally given to a family member to watch as they were still usable, but even so I've probably got enough rejects and failed burns on a couple of spindles to keep me in coffee coasters for a few years to come. I'm so glad to have left all that behind.

    All the burning was only to backup stuff which was already saved to a hard drive, but if it's a backup, I need it to be a backup, not a "burned copy I hope will be readable if I need it" type of backup.

    So far, the only downside to using pairs of hard drives for backups as opposed to burning a copy to disc (at least for me) is being able to always go back in time. I never threw a disc away. So even if I replaced a file I still had an older copy somewhere, even if it took me an hour to find it. Using hard drives, I usually replace older files with newer copies. There's been a couple of times I'd have liked to be able to dig out the older copy..... sometimes I can...... if it was originally burned to disc.
    Last edited by hello_hello; 24th Mar 2014 at 09:19.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by hello_hello View Post
    I'm not sure which side you're arguing, if there is one...
    That's probably THE salient point, by the way. There are all kinds of issues for reliability including the arguments that opposed a Single Media or Method to backups.

    But we haven't discussed User Discipline, exactly, and one of my reasons to burn the occasional handful-of-disks is because Hard Drives Make Deleting So Easy.

    How many times have you said to yourself, "I don't need that anymore... never will" and deleted some file or folder... ONLY to discover a Real Need within days, hours or weeks?

    And while that certainly is not a 'constant event' for most users (any user?), it DOES happen to all of us.

    I think this is why Word Processors can be loathed by novelists, too. "They make editing too easy, and I can wipe out days of work rather than saving my original hard-copy and starting fresh with re-typing Chapter 9 on good ol' paper..."

    (As if that writer never had a fireplace for chapters worth of 'kindling'-!)

    The ease of editing and deleting makes Hard Drives susceptible to "user error" or "misjudgement", let's say.

    I think all of us have the tools available to re-access an old IDE drive. How many have the ability to access the much older MFM drives? When's the last time any of us have found a 'controller' that accepted MFM connectors? "Oh, about the same time that the 486 motherboards arrived..."

    ding ding ding... right answer!

    We're already seeing new SATA-type connectors. And we'll see total replacements by 2020. Somewhere around there, I also suppose the 5.25" media/drive will be gone, too. (Gee - will the JAZ Drive Format return?!!)

    "User discipline" will remain one of the issues that no one can predict, coach or demand. Both in timeliness or thoroughness - as you pointed out about "how many burns have you done and left X megabytes behind because they didn't fit on THAT media?"

    Of course, hard-drives have exactly the same issue - except now I'm looking at leaving TERABYTES behind because I've got puny 3Tb as my old spares while I've got new RAIDs built with the 6Tb VonZeppelin heliums-!

    But tell me - what length of time is too much for a Burn Time?

    I have thought a Too Long Burn Time would be something close to a 1-to-1 radio for watchability. "I don't want to spend 2 Burn Hours on a 2-hour movie!"

    Would that be an ultimate violation for you? I'm not sure I could even justify a 1-to-2 Burn-To-Watching ratio.

    When I think about BluRay burns, and then their successor is promising 3-4-5 times the data AND an increase in burn-time, I sort of want those designers to consider "LENGTH OF BURN TIME" as a huge mountain to overcome.

    Otherwise, "just give us USB 4.0 connectors from a bare HDD into our TV"!
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    Back to M DISKS for a moment (gee - what a concept - "on topic"!)...

    Do the various off-standard formats represent any true gain into an uncertain future of Players? I have questions about Double-Layers even because of the need for Future Compatibility across a broad range of players.

    It's not the Disk itself that is the issue - it's the playback of the disk. It seems that the best idea is to increase the likelihood that any disc (and its data) can be re-accessed into the future on any number of players.

    So does the M DISK's value for future readability across a broad range of players offer a concern? If so, then their promise of a short-term reliability needs to be paired against the long-term readability across any future player that observes some kind of "standard DVD access" promise.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by OllieTSB View Post
    So does the M DISK's value for future readability across a broad range of players offer a concern? If so, then their promise of a short-term reliability needs to be paired against the long-term readability across any future player that observes some kind of "standard DVD access" promise.
    Burned m-discs are supposed to be readable by most standard drives/players able to read DVD-ROM discs. It is entirely possible that the "most DVD players can play them" is simply meant to cover worn-out players (which often fail to read other burned media too) or some quirky early DVD players which never could read any type of burned media. I've not seen anything specific that explains the reasons why a minority of DVD players would be unable to read m-discs.

    To be honest, there is no guarantee that future DVD players will be able to read all other kinds of DVD media that today's players read either. Take DVD-RAM. Does even Panasonic still make players that read DVD-RAM discs? I don't think all DVD and Blu-Ray drives made today can do it.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Interesting, and also because it's Ritek. They sell Blu-ray discs as well: http://www.mdisc.com/catalog/
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    I have some beliefs that the standard DVD format will be readable for years to come. But is that "one more decade? two?" Hmmm... I might take a bet on "10 years from now" but "20" will certainly make me only search for pocket-change for any Vegas odds.

    Throw in an M-Disk standard and Double-Layers via various Consumer Burners, and I think the "future readability" factor plummets. I do think DVD-RAMs are readable because that 'standard' is a bit-setting and the data-formats (sector sizes, sector-heading and sector-end details) remain the same. But all it takes is for some Player to say, "Strange bit-setting! I now refuse to read ANY of it!" and kablooey!

    I actually have greater doubts about a BluRay's future readability than I do CD or DVD, simply because BluRay has licensing patents with Sony-Philips so somewhere, some bean-counter is going to say "Nope, don't buy those ROM chips for assembly - we'll be doing CD-DVD and XVD-whatever, and not pay for old old BD playback."

    I also think the Optical Disk Industry slit it's own throat by tolerating/encouraging all of these different PLUS R, MINUS R, RW, RAM, etc. badges (and capabilities).

    It doesn't take long to be standing along the retail aisles of the Disk Blanks section to hear repeated customers ask, "What's the difference? What's the best?" when holding PLUS or MINUS R cakeboxes. Somewhere, someone needed to pull the plug and say "NO MORE FORMATS!! JUST USE ONE!" and prevent every consumer from having any confusion beyond capacity. And if the Automobile Player Industry was competent, they'd have put DVD Players in every dashboard, too. DVD-MP3 - "play 1,000 songs..." sounds great... until someone realizes, "Gag - I've got to cycle thru 1,000 OTHER songs to find my ONE favorite?!!"

    Sometimes, smaller is better.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    (If Gonca checks in, I've noted that DigitalFAQ is still entertaining the fungus concepts to lesser degrees, but when the discussion of a New Optical Disk standard emerges in those threads, that concern reappeared! Wheeee...)
    Quote Quote  
  25. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by OllieTSB View Post
    I also think the Optical Disk Industry slit it's own throat by tolerating/encouraging all of these different PLUS R, MINUS R, RW, RAM, etc. badges (and capabilities).

    It doesn't take long to be standing along the retail aisles of the Disk Blanks section to hear repeated customers ask, "What's the difference? What's the best?" when holding PLUS or MINUS R cakeboxes. Somewhere, someone needed to pull the plug and say "NO MORE FORMATS!! JUST USE ONE!" and prevent every consumer from having any confusion beyond capacity. And if the Automobile Player Industry was competent, they'd have put DVD Players in every dashboard, too. DVD-MP3 - "play 1,000 songs..." sounds great... until someone realizes, "Gag - I've got to cycle thru 1,000 OTHER songs to find my ONE favorite?!!"
    The "different" +/-/RAM formats issue is unique to DVD. There's no such thing in the CD or BD worlds. As to why they got created for DVD, it's been so long that it's really difficult to find information about it. I did find an old article from almost 11 years ago that said that Sony, Philips and Thompson (RCA) were unhappy with the way things were going with the DVD Forum, which they were also members of. If I remember correctly, I think that Pioneer was the big mover in the DVD Forum and Sony and Philips in particular had some issues with Pioneer. To be blunt, the technology behind the + variant is superior to the - variant. For single layer write once DVDs, users probably don't notice any difference. But DVD+R DL and DVD+RW are a lot better than their - counterparts, even though today most modern hardware should be OK with either. One of the problems with the DVD Forum was that they sort of had to force fit RW and DL media into their format where as the DVD Alliance people (this is the + group) made a better design decision in the beginning, which made it easier to get +RW and +R DL working. DVD+RW and DVD+R DL are much cheaper to produce than their - equivalents due to having fewer errors on the production line and better supported on various players. DVD-RAM is OLD technology that has long been superseded. I know that UK people still love it, but it's dying. There's no DVD+RAM because likely the DVD Alliance people realized that the whole DVD-RAM idea was obsolete, so there was no need to compete with it. Remember some manufacturers lived in both worlds (DVD Forum and DVD Alliance) so there's never been any reason or need to kill off one. HD-DVD and BD weren't compatible at all, which is why consumers pushed for a fight to the death to settle the format wars on only one format for HD video. + and - DVD formats are close enough that it's just not a big deal to support both.

    I'm not fond of this, but cars are moving towards not playing ANY discs at all and only playing via USB devices or Bluetooth. You can still find CD support and a few cars do support audio on DVD discs, like MP3 on DVD as you mention, but if you need to play discs, the reality is that aftermarket players are much better. I've got a CD/DVD player in one of my cars and I use it all the time to play music that I've archived to DVD. Today the cheaper the car, the more likely it is to not be able to play any discs at all. This will slowly work its way up the chain to more expensive cars. I've read that car designers are dying to get back the dash space that currently holds radios and disc players so they can use it for other purposes.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jman98 View Post
    The "different" +/-/RAM formats issue is unique to DVD. There's no such thing in the CD or BD worlds.
    Uh... RAM, yes there are. RW, yes. There are also different capacity differences, too. -70, -80, -90 - all of these have been played out in the CD Life Cycle. SS-DS issues, too.

    I've thought the DVD World hopped onto this bandwagon despite the great confusion that these CDs offered, and then CDs started offering Overburn Capacities as well, and some fancier MtRainer-type Burn capabilities, although these supposedly didn't require different Blanks Formats.

    Whatever the labeling is used, the argument is "The more labeling, the greater the confusion to the consumers" and the eventual erosion of interest from a larger purchasing segment.

    When I hear these industry honchos blather about their lowered revenues, I still think "You did it to yourselves!"

    Of course, there's a counterargument they want to offer: "Our Rightsholder Partners didn't really want us to sell Blanks to consumers anyway." That's always a good fallback. "We didn't really want to sell stuff, anyway..."
    Quote Quote  
  27. Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    Burned m-discs are supposed to be readable by most standard drives/players able to read DVD-ROM discs. It is entirely possible that the "most DVD players can play them" is simply meant to cover worn-out players (which often fail to read other burned media too) or some quirky early DVD players which never could read any type of burned media. I've not seen anything specific that explains the reasons why a minority of DVD players would be unable to read m-discs.
    It's possibly a reflectivity issue, or maybe the ability of the laser to focus correctly depending on the type of disc.... I don't really know, but I recall "back in the day", CD players were sometimes sold in packaging which advertised the ability to play writeable discs, and the ability to play re-writable discs was an extra bonus. I owned one portable CD player (CD walkman..... that makes me feel a little old) which was a disaster with burned CDs from the day I bought it, but fine with pressed discs.

    Pressed discs have pits which reflect the laser in different directions while burned discs rely on the reflectivity of the layer behind the dye and the laser being reflected or not, while I think M-discs use a completely different dye and the laser burns pits in it like a pressed discs. I guess the dye itself must be reflective... I'm not sure about the one.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North America
    Search Comp PM
    H_H, I think I'm halfway arguing about "addendums to standards" that reduce a Player's prospects based on the Player's Generation. First-Gen Players - like that Sony CD Walkman - don't stand a chance against 90-min CD. Of course, the hardware sellers love this - "That means, you need to buy more more more!" and the landfills keep going "groan! NO MORE PUH-LEEEZE! Just keep using the Standard 1.0 Device!"

    I can certainly understand an engineer's idle time being consumed with the question, "What else could be done with this basic Standard 1.0?"

    Going back to the worthiness of M-DISKS, I'm still not certain. I know they are marketed to 'last longer'. I don't know about "tastes better", though. I'm sure there are at least two marketing schemes for all of these 'addendum formats to Version 1.0'. I think Bob Uecker would make sure of that.

    I love to think that these addendum blanks would all be played-back and accessible on Device 1.0's, of course, or at least until the Devices died a more natural death than intentional product-obsolescence.

    M-DISKS were written about for a year before their appearance. And we have this thread but I don't see a lot of hoopla about them, specifically. I see far more articles about "optical disks are dead!" than "M-Disks Are Great".

    Which I'm rather sorry for. I like the portability of disks, and I liked the entertainment industry fueling the ability for home movie-fans to preserve collections of their favorite entertainment. The entertainment industry isn't doing that, to a large extent now, though.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!