DVD-R, +R, -RW, +RW - is there some inherient advantage?

[dc91gt]

I'm looking for a DVD burner - to burn discs for DVD standalone players
and to backup data to.

After reading about 3 dozen threads on this subject, i'm still a tad confused about one particular subject...

Given the two drives I'm considering are the Sony DRU500a and the Pioneer A04/A05, it gets down to one issue: + or - or both.

From everything I've read, I don't see why one would want to burn
to +R/RW media v.s. -R/RW media or visa-versa. Both are 4.7GB, both
read/write roughly the same speed.

Given the needs of most people (ok, or maybe just me) of wanting to burn movies for my standalone player and to back up data for archival
storage, there seems to be absolutely no difference - except + media
costs more.

The only thing of any interest with +RW is lossless linking - however, from what I can tell by the little information out there, it is only beneficial when you are encoding directly to the DVD drive. I don't know about you, but thats what I have hard drives for.

So am I missing something?

-d

[JasonK]

There are also compatibility issues. Some players may work better with one vs the other.

And there are speed issues. The cheapest DVD-R is 1x, but cheapest DVD+R is 2.4x. Same is true for cheapest RW formats.

[dc91gt]

Well doing a simple search on the DVD player database on here:

Searching with just the following field checked:

DVD-R - 761 players returned as supporting it.

DVD+R - 365 players returned as supporting it.

I'd think that speaks rather loudly.

-d

[-jsl-]

There are many more players tested with DVD-R than DVD+R cause the latter is a newer format so that does not tell you much...

[Swedish Eagle]

In theory +R/+RW is supported of more players and DVD-rom than
-R/-RW.

Check out the unoficial DVD+R7+RW site.

http://www.dvdplusrw.org/

In the compability list you can find that :

Players Tested 753
Support for +RW 567
Support for +R 505

Rom Tested 210
Support for +RW 146
Support for +R 166


To add to this is that alot of the players/roms have only been tested
with on of the discs which means that there will be alot more that is
compatible.

[bac]

There is a major backwards compatibility issue with dvd+r and dvd+rw.
If your dvd reader requires this compatibility setting (many laptop drives do), then
dvd+r is less compatible than dvd-r.
Unfortunately the sony dru500 seems to have no way to set the dvd book type, and
so it makes this compatibility problem very difficult to workaround.

See:
http://www.dvdplusrw.org/resources/bitsettings.html
http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/

and

http://www.dvdplusrw.org/resources/compatibilitylist_dvdrom.html

It is misleading of sony to market this drive as "ultimate support of dvd formats" (see
drive's carton) when they do not even provide a method to set the dvd book type. Older drives have this capability.

[bac]

In theory +R/+RW is supported of more players and DVD-rom than
-R/-RW.

Rom Tested 210
Support for +RW 146
Support for +R 166

Many of the entries you are counting as supported have a "(cs)" indication next to them.
Any line with a (cs) indication requires the compatibility bitsetting. Since that bitsetting
cannot be achieved with the dru500, none of those drives can read dvd+r or dvd+rw
that is burned by the dru500. The %age of drives that have read compatibility is then only
around 60% - lower than sometimes reported for dvd-r read compatibility.

[dc91gt]

compatibility aside..

does anyone have an answer to my original question? is there some advantage to +R +RW? I can't seem to find one.

-d

[ItsMe]

compatibility aside..

does anyone have an answer to my original question? is there some advantage to +R +RW? I can't seem to find one.

-d

There are more '+' drives on the market so you get a wider choice when it comes to bundled software. All the drives are made by Ricoh so each drive is as good as its firmware.

The '+RW' format is supposedly better that '-RW' format for backing up data.

The '-' format has been around longer so I suspect it is more mature.

[epo]

In what way is +RW better than -RW for backing up data? As it allows to write as huge floppy? IMHO this is worst backup method ever. DAO and TAO allow many sequential sectors to be dead and data is still retreiveable. (Same applies to CD).
I had lots of laughs, when my boss just moved data to CD-R and something went wrong. You can guess the consequences. (Had told many times "use Nero!")
Using DAO or TAO I don't see advantage of one over another.

[ItsMe]

Note I did say: 'The '+RW' format is ***supposedly*** better that '-RW' format for backing up data.'

http://www.dvdplusrw.org/pc/pccomparison.html

[Gil T Pleasure]

I believe the advantage is in standalone video recorders. Because +RW feature lossless-linking (not buffer underrun), the recorder is akin to a VCR where you can add new video footage anywhere in the disc. DVD-RW can only add new video footage following the last recorded chapter or title. Also, there is no need to finalize +RW discs unless you make “edits compatible” (hide chapters so they don’t play on DVD players). Since there is no finalizing, you can always add more video footage to the +RW disc. You have to unfinalize -RW, add new footage, and then finalize it again.

If you’re editing movies on your PC, the Pioneer A05 is bundled with software that matches +RW features such as Quick Format to quickly format the –RW disc, Quick Grow to quickly re-open finalized disc, and Multi Border to add more data to finalized disc.

[vitualis]

In terms of compatibility, the "theoretical" compatibility benefits of + over - do not exist (or have not bourne out in the real world).

-R is as compatible (and possibly more so) than +R
-RW is as compatible (and possibly more so) than +RW

In terms of video disc creation, the "-" formats (especially DVD-R) holds the advantage. It is probably the most compatible and will continue to be so as many newer DVD players are released as DVD-R compatible (one of the benefits of the "-" format being officially supported by the DVD Forum).

In terms of PC backup / storage, the "+" formats (especially DVD+RW) holds the advantage. Whether you use it or not, some people like the idea of a "big floppy", and +R/W is probably better supported on the PC. They are also generally faster (though not necessarily the case with the newer "-" drives).

In terms of set-top DVD video recorders, the "+" format is more flexible (and hence probably better). This, however, is a relatively small market at present and many not have a large impact overall.

In all likelihood, both formats will survive until its successor comes and replaces them.

Regards.

[dun4cheap]

A laymans answer. I found this is the PC Club add I just got today. Now before you shoot me, I did not write the article. It is verbatem to the article in the PC Club add I recieved today. I do however believe that it gives a quick explanation of the main differences. I hope you guys find this interesting.



Which is Better, DVD+R or DVD-R?

DVD-R is the first DVD recording format to be compatible with standalone DVD players. Its goal is to make recording to DVD's affordable. This type is supported by 60% to 85% of DVD players. Since this format is older, the feature set is basic. However, DVD-R has one advantage for professional video authoring: DVD-R hardware allows video producers to use CSS copy protection on their DVD's

DVD+R is newer and built with home video users in mind. Its compatability with DVD players is similiar to DVD-R, with 60% to 85% of players able to play DVD disks written in the DVD+R format. The biggest advantage of DVD+R: It adds the ability to manually define chapters in the video after recording. Also, with DVD+R there is no need to finalize the disk after recording. The downside to DVD+R: there is no way of applying CSS copy protection.

The two major DVD recordable formats are very similiar. With relatively modern standalone DVD player, there should be no problem playing a movie recorded in either format.

[vitualis]

DVD+R is newer and built with home video users in mind. Its compatability with DVD players is similiar to DVD-R, with 60% to 85% of players able to play DVD disks written in the DVD+R format. The biggest advantage of DVD+R: It adds the ability to manually define chapters in the video after recording. Also, with DVD+R there is no need to finalize the disk after recording. The downside to DVD+R: there is no way of applying CSS copy protection.

The ability to manaully define chapters is only appropriate with stand-alone DVD+R/W video recorders. Thus, not a particularly big advantage if you don't have one.

Similarly, the ability or lack thereof of CSS is generally irrelevant for the home user...

Regards.

[Xesdeeni]

This whole argument gets quite tedious, and is filled with misinformation. What follows has no more credibility than the above, and may just be adding noise to the thread, but hopefully it will help someone:

There are three basic issues which affect compatibility:

1. DVD reflectivity
2. DVD ID code
3. DVD contents

1....

DVD-RWs and DVD+RWs are made of EXACTLY THE SAME MATERIAL.

DVD-Rs and DVD+Rs are made of EXACTLY THE SAME MATERIAL.

So with respect to reflectivity, the formats are the same. If a player can read one RW or R format better than the other RW or R format, then it is not the reflectivity of the DVD in question.

2....Here is where the differences between the + & - formats (but always RW vs. RW and R vs R) show up. I don't know the specifics, but there is an ID code associated with the DVD. The players use this ID code to determine how, and even whether, to read the DVD.

You should be ahead of me on the logic here:

If a DVD player doesn't recognize the ID, then it could punt altogether. In this case, it may not recognize the DVD at all. Since the DVD-R format is supported by the DVD Forum, the ID was specified before the others, so some players recognize DVD-R, but no others.

Or, it could default to a single-layer (pressed) DVD. In this case, the low reflectivity of DVD*RWs (both) means that the drives will not read these DVDs. This usually means that both DVD*R formats can be read, because their reflectivity is within the single-layer pressed DVD spec.

DVD+RW drives have a trick they use to lie to the players. They tell the drive they are double-layer pressed DVDs. Theoretically, this allows the player to read the lower reflectivity of the DVD*RWs. In practice, this helps some players, but others are now confused, because they see only one layer, but it's not a second layer, but it has a second-layer reflectivity. The result is that just about as many players fail with the "compatibility bit" set as begin working. BTW, there is no reason, other than that it just hasn't been done, that DVD-RWs can't do the same thing. And note that DVD*Rs don't have any reason to pull this trick.

3...This is a red herring. Unless the exact same software is used to author and burn the DVDs, comparisons will be inaccurate due to compatibility issues between software and players.


* Another note. Many early comparisons were made between DVD-Rs and DVD+RWs. These continue to be cited, but it should be obvious that this is comparing apples to oranges.

-- Conclusion:

DVD-RWs and DVD+RWs are just about the same compatibility. The "compatibility bit" may help a specific DVD player deal with a DVD+RW drive, but this is impractical for distribution of DVDs, since it will break as many as it helps. Some players may read one and not the other, but those are statistical anomolies, so unless you know you own one and will author just for that player, this shouldn't be a consideration. DVD-RWs and DVD+RWs cost about the same. DVD+RWs have the "lossless linking" technology, which is useful only for real-time recording.

DVD-Rs and DVD+Rs are just about the same compatibility. Some players may specifically disallow any but DVD-Rs (and pressed DVDs), but those are very few, so unless you know you own one and will author just for that player, this is a very minor consideration. DVD-Rs have been around longer than DVD+Rs, so they can be bought for cheaper. But there are also a lot of poor-quality DVD-Rs that either record at slower speeds, use poor material so they offer odd incompatibilites, or have issues near the outer edge of the DVD. You get what you pay for, so I believe it is only fair to compare name-brand to name-brand, and these prices are about the same for DVD-Rs & DVD+Rs. DVD+Rs have the "lossless linking" technology, which is useful only for real-time recording.

So what's your best bet? Buy the Sony DRU-500A so you can record both, upgrade the firmware so you can record both at 4x (and praise Sony for doing EXACTLY the opposite of what Philips and HP did), and then shop for the least expensive name-brand media you can get of either format.

Xesdeeni
[Disclaimer: I bought a DVD+R/RW drive when they were 2.4x/2.4x and DVD-R/RW drives were 2x/1x, because I knew I would be making a lot of DVD*RWs while I figured out how to author a video DVD and I didn't want to wait as long. If I were buying today, I'd follow my own advice above ]

Xesdeeni

[Gil T Pleasure]

Also, with DVD+R there is no need to finalize the disk after recording.

Although Philips claims DVD+R finalization time is faster than DVD-R, nonetheless the disc must be finalize before it can be read by standalone DVD players.

[PhilipL]

Withdrawn

[Kennyshin]

Media cost and availability matter more than any other factor for the majority of PC users. So far, Ritek remains the only large-scale manufacturer of DVD+R media producing a few millions of DVD+R disks each month. That's the real problem for DVD+R to compete with DVD-R.

Everything could change drastically in less than six months as the three largest CD writer makers expand into DVD writers - LG, Samsung, and LiteOn all recently announced they would. Remember when there were only 2x and 4x CD writers from Yamaha, Philps, Teac, Plextor, and so on? All of them combined now account for maybe only 10% of worldwide market for CD writers. In case you haven't heard, LG Electronics said in its press conference in Seoul it'll produce DVD Multi writers that can write to DVD-RAM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, and DVD+RW next year. LG and Samsung have been in the DVD Forum and RDVDC (the two groups leading DVD-RAM and DVD-RW formats) with close ties with Hitachi and Panasonic for a long time so it's natural for them to continue support for DVD-RAM/-R/-RW. LiteOn and other Taiwanese makers will support all except DVD-RAM.

So my opinion is that technological differences matter little but it will be the industry support that will let all of them co-exist until Blu-ray or whatever comes next.

[bac]

This whole argument gets quite tedious, and is filled with misinformation

The argument will keep coming up as long as the compatibility
details are not well documented in a FAQ. I see nothing in
the main DVD faq. The dvdplusrw.org info is on the glossy
side, leaving one to believe that compatibility is largely achieved
if you rev your firmware.

[Taky]

Microsoft had announced adding native support of DVD+RW in the future OS.

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-879980.html

I have a Sony DRU-500A. Quite happy about it.

[-jsl-]

Also with +R most hardware by default writes a DVD-ROM flag and not a +R flag. If it wrote a +R flag it would only achieve around 60% compatibility. Again having this incorrect flag can only hinder future compatibility, not improve it. It is worse with write-once media as there is no option to reset it.

Source? Most burners does not write DVD-ROM flag by default (HP does it though). If you're talking about DVD+R the "60 %" number is not correct. There are very few DVD players that will read DVD+R media with the DVD-ROM flag if they can't do it with the "correct" DVD+R flag. Writing the DVD-ROM flag is principally a fix for DVD+RW and DVD players confusing DVD+RW media with a dual layer DVD.

Philips decided to stick with the DVD Video format for real-time recording even though this format has no defect management when recording, and is hard to make real-time and reliable. This is why people complain of disc errors with the Philips set-top recorders but you rarely here of similar issue with Panasonic or Pioneer recorders. The DVD Forum only approved a simplified method of writing in real-time for the DVD Video format to ensure compatibility and good customer experience. To allow for all the features you expect on recordable DVD, the DVD Forum approved the DVD Video Recording format, this allows full defect management and random access. It allows for non-linear editing and erasing of previously written material. You cannot erase anything on +RW despite the marketing claims, you can only over-write manually in set-top recorders and that is no better than the VHS system it is advertised to replace.

Of course in getting something much better you have to break compatibility, which is the cost of moving forward.

The whole point with using a recordable DVD media is compability with DVD players imho. If you skip that part it's of course not hard to develop something better like DVD-RAM which is more flexible than DVD-RW (VR) too but with near zero compability.
I doubt the "disc error" problem depends on flaws in the DVD+RW format. Anyway I have not had any problems with that (or anything else) and I'm sure Pioneer and Panasonic recorders have their problems too.
The image quality is for sure better than VHS... If you want advanced editing capabilities I would wait for a DVD+R/RW recorder with a built in HDD unit but if you don't care about compability you can of course stick with a Panasonic recorder.

[donpedro]

My simple view on this issue. I have Sopny DRU-500A that supports both formats. All my DVD players are working with -R/-RW and -R is cheaper than +R so why pay more for same result . I don't mind wait 60 minutes istead of 30 minutes for burning.

[PhilipL]

Withdrawn

[Xesdeeni]

I believe the original question concerned which format was better.

I don't think the usefullness of a DVD recorder was raised.

But while we are on that subject , I think the primary mark against these devices is exactly what PhilipL mentioned

Try and record 4 hours that most consumers take for granted on VHS tape, and the picture quality is subjectively worse for most people on DVD...

And they want as much as $1000 for that crap!

Combining the hard drive capture with the DVD recorder is now available, but the same problem exists when you decide to commit a recorded program to the DVD. Plus, does anyone know if you can edit commercials out as you burn it to DVD?...I'm guessing not.

In the near term, either DVD burner changers will need to come to market, or MPEG 4 (or derivatives like DivX) encoders will need to replace the MPEG 2 encoders. Eventually Blue-Ray may emerge, but I suspect that would take longer than MPEG 4 encoders, especially considering the number of multiple DVD players and the fact that there is already a DVD/DivX player out (http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/021022/047810.html).

Xesdeeni