why dvd+r(w) is superior to dvd-r(w)

[jeex]

read & react


http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113/

[Bob W]

Your poll is flawed because it doesn't have a choice for those that use both +/-. DVD+R may have some technical edge however now I will tell you the secret of why DVD-R is superior.

DVD-R cost less.

[FulciLives]

I don't see how the title of this THREAD "why dvd+r(w) is superior to dvd-r(w)" has anything to do with WHAT type of MEDIA you use? Unless you are trying to put forth the idea that DVD+R/RW is going to win this poll.

On this forum?
I think not!

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
I voted DVD-R/RW although I actually use DVD-R (not DVD-RW) plus I also use DVD-RAM sometimes with a stand alone DVD recorder. I have both a DVD computer BURNER and a DVD stand alone recorder. Both are in the -R camp. I wouldn't touch DVD+anything with a 10 foot pole.

[Bob W]

I can go either way since I have both types of burners however it's been a while since I used the NEC 1100A burner because I don't care to pay $2 or more for DVD+R media when the end result is the same (they both work on all my players).

[anosis]

OK, + is superior to -, but that has not yet stopped me from having a 0% error rate with my Pioneer 105.

We all know that computer technology is old as soon you buy it. There is always someting better around the corner, but that does not mean that the old stuff is obsolete.

[FulciLives]

OK, + is superior to -, but that has not yet stopped me from having a 0% error rate with my Pioneer 105.

We all know that computer technology is old as soon you buy it. There is always someting better around the corner, but that does not mean that the old stuff is obsolete.

EXCUSE ME ?!?!?!
Since when is the "+" format better than the "-" format?
It's a bastard format anyway. Screw it!

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Faustus]

Though I tend to agree about the Bastard format thing, it is a completely relible format that burns movies. Technically its is better, but I've not seen any problems with "-" that require to be fixed. I use "-" and will continue to do so, except for an occasional deal the disc are simply cheaper on a day to day basis. Plus Pioneer makes a great product.

[FulciLives]

Technically its is better, but I've not seen any problems with "-" that require to be fixed. I use "-" and will continue to do so, except for an occasional deal the disc are simply cheaper on a day to day basis. Plus Pioneer makes a great product.

Again I don't understand how you or anyone else can say that the "+" formats are better than the "-" formats. If nothing else there are things you can do with DVD-RAM that just can't be done with any of the "+" formats including DVD+RW

So again where are you "getting" that the "+" format is technically better?

As for DVD-RAM I can do a recording in my stand alone DVD recorder ... pop it into my computer ... edit it (if need be) then use an authoring program to get a nice custom made menu and custom chapters. I can do this WITHOUT re-encoding including keeping the 2.0 AC-3 audio that the stand alone DVD recorder creates. It is a very simple process that includes NO software re-encoding. Tell me how you can easily (if at all) do that with any format OTHERTHAN DVD-RAM!

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[taz291819]

Umm, it's called DVD+VR...

[FulciLives]

Umm, it's called DVD+VR...

You cannot compare DVD+RW to DVD-RAM
It is akin to comparing a YUGO to a PORSCHE
In short one works better than the other.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[PhilipL]

Hi

Interesting article which has other people asking the same questions I have asked many times, see the messages taken from the article from members of the site:



Reaction Posted by Ian@CDRLabs.com on 23 June 2003 - 02:40 | Moderated @ 0 |
Hasn't hardware based defect management been a feature of the DVD+RW format since day one?


Reaction Posted by ckin2001 on 23 June 2003 - 11:11 | Moderated @ 1 |
the article says that while hardware based defect management is a feature of dvd+rw, it has not been implemented in any drive as of yet.



Reaction Posted by Ian@CDRLabs.com on 23 June 2003 - 13:42 | Moderated @ 1 |
If thats the case, then every drive manufacturer out there has been falsely advertising this feature since the first DVD+RW drive was announced.



Reaction Posted by alexnoe on 23 June 2003 - 18:21 | Moderated @ 1 |
Indeed...I see a large gap between what dvd+rw is capable of, and what dvd+rw drives nowadays can do...


Lets see, the article rates +RW ahead of DVD-RW and DVD-RAM (even Microsoft acknowledges DVD-RAM is the best solution) on the basis of Mt Rainier that has never been implemented in any DVD Writer to date? I see no time-slip on +RW despite its x2.4 speed yet DVD-RAM has been doing it for years.

It also talks about 32k and 2k lossless linking while saying DVD-RW/DVD-R also supports lossless linking but then ignores lossless linking through its comparsions. DVD-RW/R writers all support lossless linking, 32k and 2k was simply an option easier for manufacturers when DVD-RW/DVD-R came to market some 3 or 4 years before +R/+RW. Of course lossless linking has no affect on making a DVD Video anyway.

Lets ponder these questions: If +RW is so good, why do no +RW set-top recorders support time-slip, like DVD-RAM? Why do Philips set-top recorders fail time and time again with "disc errors"? Why has Sony and others stripped +RW of many of the +VR features on set-top recorders, is this due to unreliability? What has been the difficulties in implementing Mt Rainier for it to take so long from the press release, constant marketing of the feature, to actually making it into a shipping drive? Mt Rainier makes no difference to making a DVD Video, it is only for data on a PC Writer. DVD-RW also now has defect management, the difference is it hasn't been constantly sold to us some 18 months before it was ready!

I nice little marketing spin from the RW Alliance, expect to see the article linked too shortly from the RW Alliance homepage, and dvdplusrw.

In reality there is nothing you can or can not do with one format that you can do with the other. The biggest difference between them is "plus" (a nice marketing word to give people a warm feeling) is marketed hard.

To quote alexnoe, "I see a large gap between what dvd+rw is capable of, and what dvd+rw drives nowadays can do... ", well ain't that the truth. Marketing for you, plain and simple.

Regards

Philip

[Cornucopia]

FulciLives,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but here's what I do with DVD-R/W (actually had to do this today cuz a salesperson lost their only copy of a particular demo, and this was quicker than restoring an archive):

1. Record (and Finalize) in Pioneer PVR-9000. Done.

(if it needs fancy menus, branching, chapters etc)...
2. Put in computer's DVD-ROM drive
3. Demux the appropriate VOBs with TMPGEnc into .m2v and .ac3 (2.0) in hard drive folder.
4. Import into authoring app de jour, along with BMPs for menus.
5. Make new fancy DVD!
6. If using RW, erase the unneeded original (usually quick erase, coupla seconds).

This is pretty simple, even with -R/RW as long as it's recorded in DVD-Video mode. Using -VR mode and the resulting .VRO files adds a layer of complexity, but is still quite doable. No re-encoding involved. Just demux and remux.

I would guess that +VR folks could probably do the same, so it's kinda of a wash overall.

Of course, if you need to make at least 1001 directory backups/rewrites onto the same disc, that pretty much narrows down the options (only 1--DVD-RAM!).

Scott

[MJPollard]

As presumptuous as this may sound, I nevertheless think I speak for the majority when I say:

WHO IN THE HELL CARES?!?!!!

If you own +, use it and be happy. If you own -, use it and be happy. If you're looking to buy, get a dual +/- and have the best of both worlds. But please, PLEASE, PLEASE can we knock off these useless debates?!!!

[vance43211]

As presumptuous as this may sound, I nevertheless think I speak for the majority when I say:

WHO IN THE HELL CARES?!?!!!

If you own +, use it and be happy. If you own -, use it and be happy. If you're looking to buy, get a dual +/- and have the best of both worlds. But please, PLEASE, PLEASE can we knock off these useless debates?!!!

no they can't

they think all of that so-called knowledgable bullsh%t that they are talking amount to something

when the simple fact is

They back the format that they own

[Doggiedaddy]

Are we not done with this stupid topic yet. I thought when duel format burners came out everyone would see the light and hypocrisy in this flawed argument. As that dope addict Rodney King once said "can't we all just all get along"

<(;-{> Dd

[txpharoah]

Neither is truly "superior".

However, it is publicly known that +R was developed by data-driven companies for data applications. The -R format was developed by a core group of video-driven companies, including the DVD Forum - owners of the DVD logo. The outcome was that -R format is more compatible with DVD players, though that once-large 29% gap has narrowed in the past year to about 8% or so. DVD-R media is the official media of the DVD Forum, the group that owns and maintains the rights to the DVD format. The +R format is a rogue group from a business aspect.

It's all about marketing a product.

They merely market +R format to the newbies and non-techs... your casual kids and mothers and families. You buy at Best Buy and other local stores. This group is often afraid of the Internet or buying online. The +R forum has made the +R format the "AOL" of DVD burning. They merely made it easier and more available on prebuilt systems. The pricing is consumer priced.

They market -R to the techs, the video professionals, and the video hobbyists. We buy more media. We buy online. We buy in specialty shops. This group thrives online. This is also the top choice for businesses when pressing discs is not needed/wanted. We also rarely buy our computers pre-built, so it won't just come with whatever POS they slap into the case. The pricing is business/bulk priced.

Whatever demographic you fit in is what you will see and use, for the most part.



I will admit that people like myself do proliferate the malarky that exists, insomuch as the "differences" of the media. Case in point: It's no secret to my family and friends that I work professionally with video. So I'm the "answer-man" whenever they need to know anything from linear editing to operating the remote. So I play stupid. They ask: "I just bought a DVD burner and don't know how to use it. Can you come show me?" My answer: "Maybe. What did you get?" Them: "A brand new HP!" As I shake my head at their pride in buying a POS, I answer: "Is it a +R or -R burner. I only have a -R burner, so I don't know much about those other ones. Maybe you should get a book or read the manuals or even the help files that came with your system. Or go online and check out dvdrhelp.com, even though I kow you hate the Internet." Did I spread a little bit of BS? Well, yes. But I saved myself the need for that bottle of Advil and was able to watch my own DVD work instead of showing them how to operate a mouse and explaining CSS and Macrovision and RCE to a confused expression on their face.

[-jsl-]

Lets see, the article rates +RW ahead of DVD-RW and DVD-RAM (even Microsoft acknowledges DVD-RAM is the best solution) on the basis of Mt Rainier that has never been implemented in any DVD Writer to date? I see no time-slip on +RW despite its x2.4 speed yet DVD-RAM has been doing it for years.

It's not hard to design a format if compatability is not a requirement. DVD-RAM is not a well designed DVD format simply because it has no compatability. Removable hard drives are even better then DVD-RAM and have just as good compatability with DVD players...
Mt Rainer is implemented in the Ricoh MP5240A (which I think is released in Japan now) and the Benq DW400A (production has already started).
Why are you comparing the incompatible DVD-RAM format with DVD+RW when the article was DVD+RW vs. DVD-RW? It's not possible to create a fully compatible DVD video if you use the time slip and random access writing AFAIK.

It also talks about 32k and 2k lossless linking while saying DVD-RW/DVD-R also supports lossless linking but then ignores lossless linking through its comparsions. DVD-RW/R writers all support lossless linking, 32k and 2k was simply an option easier for manufacturers when DVD-RW/DVD-R came to market some 3 or 4 years before +R/+RW. Of course lossless linking has no affect on making a DVD Video anyway.

Even when loss-less linking methods are used, the pits are not perfectly contiguous on the disc, and therefore some PI/PO errors will always occur : to minimize this effect, the location of the linking region is very important. With -RW, the linking region is in user data, and therefore useful bytes will always be corrupted there. Also since the linking occurs after the first sync, the second sync frame (and possibly the third one) will also be lost, since the sync words will not be correctly spaced in the ECC block.

Lets ponder these questions: If +RW is so good, why do no +RW set-top recorders support time-slip, like DVD-RAM? Why do Philips set-top recorders fail time and time again with "disc errors"? Why has Sony and others stripped +RW of many of the +VR features on set-top recorders, is this due to unreliability? What has been the difficulties in implementing Mt Rainier for it to take so long from the press release, constant marketing of the feature, to actually making it into a shipping drive? Mt Rainier makes no difference to making a DVD Video, it is only for data on a PC Writer. DVD-RW also now has defect management, the difference is it hasn't been constantly sold to us some 18 months before it was ready!

Although DVD-R(W) also support some defect management (Persistent-DM and DRT-DM), it is mainly software based and actions must always be initiated by a specific program. Furthermore, since DVD-RW format lacks the needed structures, address translation has to be performed also by software, and translation tables have to be stored on the user area of the disc according to a higher level specification (for instance in the sparing tables of UDF 2.0). This makes DVD-RW not well suited for simple file storage or image burning, as it requires a complete file system to benefit from defect management. Note also that although DVD-RW cannot use +MRW technology (due to technical differences), DVD+RW can very well use UDF 2.0.

I nice little marketing spin from the RW Alliance, expect to see the article linked too shortly from the RW Alliance homepage, and dvdplusrw.

Cdfreaks is an independent site (you must have missed the disclaimer) and if you can come up with an article worth to read I'm sure you can have it published too. But from reading what you write in your posts here I doubt you're able to do that...
BTW you should answer the author of the article in CDfreaks' forum instead of being a coward and writing it here where he problably won't be able to read it.

[lagerlout]

My god, I've only been visiting this site for a month and already I've turned to apathy. I really don't care what format is better, I really don't care for the reasons behind it. All I care about is that I can make a backup that works in a standalone player. And guess what? I can! And so can my uncle! And we use different formats!

Is the format war a cold one? Where no-one does anything but stand around saying how great they are?






- is still way cheaper though

[lbeck]

It's all about marketing a product.

They merely market +R format to the newbies and non-techs... your casual kids and mothers and families. You buy at Best Buy and other local stores. This group is often afraid of the Internet or buying online. The +R forum has made the +R format the "AOL" of DVD burning. They merely made it easier and more available on prebuilt systems. The pricing is consumer priced.

They market -R to the techs, the video professionals, and the video hobbyists.

This is really scary. I hope you're wrong. As a -R/RW user I'm hoping for the reasons stated elsewhere here that that the -R stays around and wins the format wars. I bought a Betamax in the '70s because it was technically surperior. Product marketing to the consumer masses (not the tech geeks like me) is how VHS won the video tape format wars.

[txpharoah]

This is really scary. I hope you're wrong. As a -R/RW user I'm hoping for the reasons stated elsewhere here that that the -R stays around and wins the format wars. I bought a Betamax in the '70s because it was technically surperior. Product marketing to the consumer masses (not the tech geeks like me) is how VHS won the video tape format wars.

That's why I compare it to AOL moreso than VHS/Betamax. AOL didn't "win" anything. In fact, had they not merged with Time Warner, they'd most likely be little more than a fading memory.

Betamax actually had other issues against it, not just recording time or price, and Betamax was marketed to the consumer. It merely lost because Sony is a company that constantly fights the status quo without any real benefits from their alternate product (because they refuse to acknowledge another company can outdo them). The Memory Stick (lost to CompactFlash) and the Optical Disk (lost to CD-R) are just a few more examples, although much like Beta, they survived as media supported by their own products. As time goes on, the Sony formats still fail, but less and less as time goes by. The Beta and Optical Drive were near-complete flops, while the Memory Stick still holds some ground, and DVD+R/W is probably their most successful media product to date (although this is most assuredly due to the format being a joint operation of several companies and because -R was not being marketed to the home consumer at the time +R/W was released).

[mkelley]

Whatever's the cheapest when I go to the store to buy it is the media I use.

[sparker]

+r best? -r best?

YAWN

[PhilipL]

Hi

With -RW, the linking region is in user data

Fine, ECC correction takes care of this block. Not perfect but it works.

With DVD+R(W), linking is performed in the last 8 channel bits (4 data bits) of an ECC block.

Great no user data is lost, but should that same user data have errors during the burn or some physical damage (or dust or fingerprints) happens to the disc at a later date, the ECC block is knackered and so there maybe problems recreating the user data. Not perfect but it works.

The article is very precise at pointing out the disadvantages of one format but then not the obvious gotchas in the other, why would this be?

Do a back search on Philips web site for white papers dating back to the dawn of DVD recording and you will see their R&D is quite open about their tests in the various tracking method options, there was never a real clear advantage with one or the other. Pros and cons exist. DVD-ROM (what DVD RW/R is trying to be) is a spiral just a like a vinyl record and by that nature shouldn’t be broken, but this isn’t a practical application, certainly not where data is concerned which means small amounts are written at a time, linking problems are a fact for any of these formats. To avoid these issues DVD-RAM is the ultimate solution, it doesn’t have a spiral, it has tracks, and does not have to be concerned with lossless linking. For the author to say that +RW exceeds DVD-RAM in its ability at recording data is simply showing a lack of understanding.

The decision to go with the addressing that +RW uses were driven by the fact that Philips could re-use patents they held based on CD-R and CD-RW. This addressing system though gives rise to problems with data density, hence Philips first proposal was for a 3Gbyte disc, later scrapped (more vapourware), and gave rise to the 2-3 year gap between DVD-RW and DVD-Rs arrival and the eventual arrival of a 4.7Gbyte +RW disc. Pioneer/DVD Forum went for their addressing system as it allowed 3.95Gbyte and then very soon after a 4.7Gbyte disc size, some 2-3 years before +RW, which had to wait it out for refinements in laser/LSI/sever and media manufacturing before it could compete with a 4.7Gbyte disc. Of course Pioneer could patent their addressing system and so get their own royalties, but it also brought us DVD recording earlier than Philips could manage.

Philips delay to the market has meant aggressive marketing, rushed products and the +VR format that appears to have serious problems and so can not have a standard feature set. Their marketing department spin anything they can. For example, just how many links and posts appeared when Microsoft said they would support +RW in Longhorn? How many links and posts appeared when Microsoft confirmed they would support all formats? Not half as many, why might that be? Just how long has Mt Rainier been pushed on +RW, and the term defect management blurred into +RW to imply the drives support defect management on everything they do? Where is Mt Rainier after 18 months of it being pushed and pushed on +RW?

Then there is the getting of a class action lawsuit against HP for what many consider a deliberate attempt at misleading people they could firmware update their drives to support writeonce media, which was spun to ensure the sale of their first generation drives.

You only need to release that +RW is just marketing. References here have been made to +RW being the AOL of DVD writing, well that seems to fit quite well.

I am not trying to say that one format is better than another, only that one has a lot more marketing baggage that people keep regurgitating time and time again, and those people should just open their eyes and put their hand out to stop the spin. Either format will do what is required of it whichever one you use.

Regards

Philip

[spath]

Since a friend pointed me to this thread, I will happily answer to PhilipL :

Lets see, the article rates +RW ahead of DVD-RW and DVD-RAM

Wrong, read again. What I say is that - is inferior to + and RAM, but I never compared the last two.

It also talks about 32k and 2k lossless linking while saying
DVD-RW/DVD-R also supports lossless linking but then ignores
lossless linking through its comparsions.

Wrong, starting from the second drawing to the end I consider only -RW lossless linking.

Lets ponder these questions: If +RW is so good, why do no +RW
set-top recorders support time-slip, like DVD-RAM?

+RW is not better than - because it cannot do something DVD-RAM does ? Logical fallacy.

I nice little marketing spin from the RW Alliance, expect to see
the article linked too shortly from the RW Alliance homepage,
and dvdplusrw.

Funny. So nobody can prefer + without being part of the Evil Alliance Conspiracy ?

In reality there is nothing you can or can not do with one format
that you can do with the other.

Wrong, both formats have several specific features. Just to name two : + has CAV writing and - has NBCA.

To quote alexnoe, "I see a large gap between what dvd+rw is
capable of, and what dvd+rw drives nowadays can do... ", well
ain't that the truth.

No, from the complete article Mt Rainier is the only feature not currently in use.

The article is very precise at pointing out the disadvantages
of one format but then not the obvious gotchas in the other,
why would this be?

Be my guest, and please point me to the "obvious gotchas" of + format.

Do a back search on Philips web site for white papers dating
back to the dawn of DVD recording and you will see their R&D
is quite open about their tests in the various tracking method
options, there was never a real clear advantage with one or
the other.

Did you search ? Then just post links to these whitepapers.

For the author to say that +RW exceeds DVD-RAM in its ability
at recording data is simply showing a lack of understanding.

See above. If there's an obvious lack, you show it in understanding english.

I am not trying to say that one format is better than another,
only that one has a lot more marketing baggage that people
keep regurgitating time and time again,

Interesting. So you are dissing the + format on every board just because you dislike the Alliance's marketing methods ?

By the way, your point about ECC correction is wrong, read again the third paragraph.

regards,
--spath.

[PhilipL]

Hi

Mmm I wonder who pointed you to this thread, maybe you didn’t need pointing to it at all Spath?

Just to name two : + has CAV

What on a drive you can actually buy?

No, from the complete article Mt Rainier is the only feature not currently in use.

Maybe that is two, CAV and Mt Rainier?

Did you search ? Then just post links to these whitepapers.

Search, it is easy enough to do. You also have not posted any references to your material, even though you yourself admit this information is impossible to come by. If this information is so hard to come by without signing NDAs or paying for books of various colours, how did you come across it?

From your article: During my study of rewritable DVD formats it seemed very clear to me that DVD-R(W) standard was not as well designed as DVD+R(W) (or even DVD-RAM).

Your article implies that DVD-RAM was not as well designed as +RW? Maybe this should read, “it seemed very clear to me that DVD-RW standard was not as well designed as DVD+RW and DVD-RAM? The use of brackets gives a double meaning. Of course even then you would be suggesting that +RW was as well designed as DVD-RAM when we know DVD-RAM is the better designed.

If +RW is so brilliant why the costly delays in bringing it to the market?

Interesting. So you are dissing the + format on every board just because you dislike the Alliance's marketing methods ?

I dislike all underhanded marketing methods, don’t you?

Of course what you are asking here is for us to believe you completely, even without knowing who you are Spath? I could simply be arguing with the same old people, wouldn’t surprise me.

I find it amazing how +RW struggles to keep up with real-time recording on Set-top recorders producing many complaints of disc errors, and Philips after 3 or 4 generations can still not make it reliable, with other manufacturers stripping features away on their +RW models, when we are constantly told from many “sources” it is the better format?

It would be interesting to have some insight from you as to why +RW appears the most fragile out of all the recordable DVD formats. How can +RW be so fragile when you tell us it is the better-designed format, or is this just on paper like Mt Rainier? What justification do you have for your conclusions when taken in light of real world experiences?

Regards

Philip

[spath]

Mmm I wonder who pointed you to this thread, maybe you didn’t need pointing to it at all Spath?

Blah, ever heard of paranoia ?

In reality there is nothing you can or can not do with one format
that you can do with the other.

Just to name two : + has CAV

What on a drive you can actually buy?

No, but you talked about formats, not drives.

No, from the complete article Mt Rainier is the only feature not
currently in use.

Maybe that is two, CAV and Mt Rainier?

Again, read carefully. CAV is not discussed in the article, thus
"from the complete article Mt Rainier is the only feature not
currently in use" is correct.

Search, it is easy enough to do. You also have not posted any
references to your material, even though you yourself admit
this information is impossible to come by. If this information
is so hard to come by without signing NDAs or paying for books
of various colours, how did you come across it?

As I said the documents I used for writing this article are not
available on the internet for the reasons I mentioned, otherwise
I would have added links to the article. Also I was able to read
them because my company bought them and signed the NDAs.

But on the other hand you claimed that there are some interesting
documents freely available on Philips' site. So this means that
you found these documents, right ? So why don't you simply post
a link, so that everybody can benefit from them ?

Your article implies that DVD-RAM was not as well designed as +RW?
Maybe this should read, “it seemed very clear to me that DVD-RW
standard was not as well designed as DVD+RW and DVD-RAM? The use
of brackets gives a double meaning. Of course even then you would
be suggesting that +RW was as well designed as DVD-RAM when we
know DVD-RAM is the better designed.

From all the remarks I got on this article you're the only one
who got this impression.

If +RW is so brilliant why the costly delays in bringing it to
the market?

It was introduced later on the market ?

Interesting. So you are dissing the + format on every board just
because you dislike the Alliance's marketing methods ?

I dislike all underhanded marketing methods, don’t you?

Sure, and both sides have used some ugly marketing lies to sell their
drives. But when I had to compare the formats, I forgot about all this
crap and focused only on the technical facts. Can you do the same ?

Of course what you are asking here is for us to believe you completely,
even without knowing who you are Spath? I could simply be arguing with
the same old people, wouldn’t surprise me.

No, the one who asks others to "believe" him is the one who's claiming
stuff without evidences (like you). I gave techincal evidences for what
I claim, and I'm waiting for a refutation. You are welcome to post such
evidences of your own opinion.

I find it amazing how +RW struggles to keep up with real-time recording
on Set-top recorders producing many complaints of disc errors, and Philips
after 3 or 4 generations can still not make it reliable, with other
manufacturers stripping features away on their +RW models, when we are
constantly told from many “sources” it is the better format?

Defective software/hardware does not mean that the format is bad.

It would be interesting to have some insight from you as to why +RW appears
the most fragile out of all the recordable DVD formats. How can +RW be so
fragile when you tell us it is the better-designed format, or is this just
on paper like Mt Rainier? What justification do you have for your conclusions
when taken in light of real world experiences

Fragile ? How did you measure +RW fragility exactly ?

By the way, you forgot to comment on this part, so I ask again :

The article is very precise at pointing out the disadvantages
of one format but then not the obvious gotchas in the other,
why would this be?

Be my guest, and please point me to the "obvious gotchas" of + format.

regards,
--spath.

[vance43211]

PhilipL

get a f*cking life

u think because u been on a computer 24 hrs a day

probaly for the last 20 years

that make u the ultimate expert (u actually beleive that technical bullsh$t that u are talking)

get off the computer

and enjoy the rest of life

u might stop being so opinionated

i tell u this now

i have less than 2 years experience on a computer

but i bet u that

anything u can do with a dvd-r(w)

i can do with a dvd+r(w)

sh*t, i bet i can do more things than u on the dvd format

i bet if u where on the other side of the fence

u would be probaly be saying the same negative things about the dvd-r format

also, dvd-r and dvd+r are the reason we all own dvd burners

not dvd-ram

[StudeBarc]

vance43211,

That's pretty well put. Poor old Phil just hasn't been the same since Pioneer decided Dual Format was the way to go. Funny how he keeps going on and on about DVD-Ram. At any rate here's how Phil sees the soon to be available A06:

"Got to admire Pioneer, in one fell swoop they will make a huge dent in sales of +RW/+R Ricoh drives (all the OEM badged ones).

It is clear that there can be no format winner, so just produce hardware that supports all the formats. I would say by Christmas this year there will be few single-format writers left for sale. "

All the formats, Phil? What about your beloved DVD-Ram...ooops forgot that one. And please, as a marketing question: Why didn't Pioneer, as the Forums No1 Company, go the way of DVD-Multi? You know -R/RW and Ram as are LG, Pana, Samsung etc.

Thanks to Spath for your fine technical article. What it really means to the members of this forum is not so clear at this point in time. As many have said before : It doesn't matter whether it's + or - as long as it works for me.

Regards
Studebarc

[Doggiedaddy]

HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! when you quote someone else in your post USE THEIR NAME WITH THE QUOTE, IT HELPS TRUST ME, DAH!!!!!!!!!!

(;-{> Dd

[txpharoah]

If +RW is so brilliant why the costly delays in bringing it to
the market?

It was introduced later on the market ?

I dislike all underhanded marketing methods, don’t you?

Sure, and both sides have used some ugly marketing lies to sell their
drives.

This speaks volumes to me....

Spath! You're new to this aren't you? Back in 2001, DVD+R was still vaporware in development stages, and +RW was still working the bugs out. The Pioneer Authoring drives and A03 drives were selling out.

And the same can be said about DVD-RAM being before -R formats. That's why -RAM continues to be a choice data backups application at many government facilities, businesses, and universities. It was first, and proved itself reliable. It also didn't need any negative marketing.

Marketing-wise, the DVD-R companies say very little. They are operated by the DVD Forum, owners of the DVD logo and the privileges of its use. For them, that was enough. They are the official format, and that's that.

DVD+R/W on the other hand... well, when you're the new guy with several disadvantages struggling to get market share, you tend to say anything. They are an unofficial/rogue format, created as an attempt to outdo BOTH -RAM and -R (which failed on both counts), and at such a late date that they missed the bus on the big sales. Corner a wild animal... that's what the +RW Alliance is right now. They know they are still not the worldwide leaders like -R format, so they fill consumers full of bullshit. Why? Because of all your audiences, consumers are the easiest to buy into things. Pros, hobbiests and businesses are not. If -R would have marketed to the consumer back in 2000-2001 as aggressively as +R now, we'd have NEVER seen the +R format as anything more than a joke (just like we view home Beta today). But that's Pioneer's loss, not mine.

Consumers were the last available untapped audience for +R to hit. In other arenas, they don't have an ice cube's chance in Hell these days. That's what happens when you're slow.

At this point, both a solid players with near-identical features. This isn't apples vs oranges. You guys are pitting a contest between Granny Smith Apples and Macintosh Apples (the fruit). They're Apples. Who the hell cares? Buy from the demographic you fit in, and hope that the incompatibility differences on DVD-Video continue to shrink as they have in the past 12 months. The easiest fix on that is to just get a new player since your work will most likely be home work (referring to consumers that buy the +R format).

Some of you really buy into the marketing... which reminds me, I've got a 20-acre lot for sale in Florida. Prime location. Lots of greenery. Your own water source. Lush inhabited area, great place to settle. Custom-built home. What is it really? A trailer in a swamp! Gee, I sure made it sound good didn't I?