VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 83
Thread
  1. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Having a 12x DVD+R drive means nothing when the 12 DVD+R do not exist. And then you have to realize is is not a steady 12x, but a build-up to that max speed.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member The village idiot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Adrift among the STUPID
    Search Comp PM
    Yeah well my -Willy is bigger than your +Willy any day, even when it is cold.

    This is all just as pointless as it has ever been. Why do people still try to justify the type of disk they use by claiming supeior performance, or what have you. It's all ******* troll bait.



    Hope is the trap the world sets for you every night when you go to sleep and the only reason you have to get up in the morning is the hope that this day, things will get better... But they never do, do they?
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf
    Having a 12x DVD+R drive means nothing when the 12 DVD+R do not exist. And then you have to realize is is not a steady 12x, but a build-up to that max speed.
    "-" camp has nothing after 8x.
    Sam Ontario
    Quote Quote  
  4. Greetings Supreme2k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Right Here, Right Now
    Search Comp PM
    I'll stick with my DVD$#%@R/RW, thanyouverymuch!
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member ViRaL1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Making the Rounds
    Search Comp PM
    Still waiting on DVD+RAM.
    Nothing can stop me now, 'cause I don't care anymore.
    Quote Quote  
  6. *rolling eyes* Sigh...

    I think that Tom's came to the right conclusion... for the wrong reasons. +R is technically superior, and I think that if people do the technical research and look at the specs, like the use of different (more robust) analog signal techniques, they will agree. And it is this technical superiority that has allowed it to push to faster speeds so soon and that also allows for better write quality as it's easier to write to a +R than it is to write to a -R. You need a better analog filter to process the -R wobble than what is needed for the +R wobble at the same speeds.

    People tend to think that they're the same and that it's all marketing hype. But that's what is seen on the surface. +R marketing is more aggressive, and in many cases, even unfair. But that hides from the crux of the issue: the whole reason that the Alliance broke off from the Forum is because they had a superior method to doing so, and the Forum didn't want to change things for a standard that had already existed.

    This isn't about market share or about speeds. This is about one format being better, and what that then translates to: better speeds, better write quality, easier to develop for, and thus better market share.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by code65536
    +R is technically superior, and I think that if people do the technical research and look at the specs, like the use of different (more robust) analog signal techniques, they will agree. And it is this technical superiority that has allowed it to push to faster speeds so soon and that also allows for better write quality as it's easier to write to a +R than it is to write to a -R. You need a better analog filter to process the -R wobble than what is needed for the +R wobble at the same speeds.
    There are many reasons why +R is not technically superior and there have been many debates on the "wobble" and basically it is just a different way of doing it, not "better".

    People tend to think that they're the same and that it's all marketing hype. But that's what is seen on the surface. +R marketing is more aggressive, and in many cases, even unfair. But that hides from the crux of the issue: the whole reason that the Alliance broke off from the Forum is because they had a superior method to doing so, and the Forum didn't want to change things for a standard that had already existed.
    I'm sorry, but YOU have fallen for the Alliance hype. The whole reason the DVD Alliance came around was NOT because they had a "superior" method. That is a load of bollucks and completely revisionist history. Let me remind you that the first commercial product the "Alliance" created was DVD+RW which had dismal stand-alone compatibility compared to the then DVD-R and DVD-RW.

    The DVD Alliance came around because of the relatively restrictive licensing around DVD-R and they saw a relatively untapped market for PC based DVD recording (i.e., DATA rather than video).

    This isn't about market share or about speeds. This is about one format being better, and what that then translates to: better speeds, better write quality, easier to develop for, and thus better market share.
    And which format is better?

    Again let me remind you that DVD-R is still the most compatible format and professional DVD authors will generally only use DVD-R for their projects. Furthermore, for market share, DVD-R media is the most commonly used media...

    Some of us still realise that there is in essence no real practical difference between + and - for home recording. Claims of one format being somehow generally "better" than the other should be exposed for what it is... marketing hogwash. The truth is both formats have advantages over the other and it this day of near universal multiformat burners, the debate is completely irrelevant.

    Regards.
    Michael Tam
    w: Morsels of Evidence
    Quote Quote  
  8. Perhaps the only thing that makes me think that PLUS is BETTER than DASH is bitsetting. I have yet to have a PLUS disk with booktype to DVD-ROM not play in a DVD player if it was burned properly. I also notice my DVD-ROMs at PC recognize PLUS faster. I know that DASH also supports booktype change but in my burning experience it isn't as reliable. For some reason only 50% booktype comes out as DVD-ROM. I think Nero is to blame.

    I personally buy Discs that are on the BEST deal regardless of the format. When everything else is equal I prefer PLUS because of bitsetting and 2 of my friends who have a PLUS only burner.

    OFF-TOPIC: What about DVD-RAM discs? What is their PC & Standalone compatability? Is it any better than either DVD+RW or -RW? I am considering a standalone DVD Recorder.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member ViRaL1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Making the Rounds
    Search Comp PM
    In overall compatibility, DVD-RAM doesn't even come close to +RW pr -RW. I believe this is mainly due to the fact that most manufacturers don't even bother to support it as they don't see the need for its advanced features. Judging from the writer list, only Panasonic, Samsung, JVC and Toshiba support DVD-RAM. Additionally DVD-RAM discs are more expensive. Because it's a 'random access' format, you can always make changes to the all or part of the data on the disc, versus erasing the entire disc and starting from scratch with +RW and -RW. If I'm not mistaken the DVD-VR and DVD+VR formats have similar features, but I believe compatibility is even lower in terms of which standalones support it. Also, DVD-RAM (at least in PC recorders) is available at up to 5x. The fastest I've seen in +RW or -RW is 4x. Another caveat, if you're a fan of the + format, you won't have any luck finding a standalone that supports + AND DVD-RAM.
    Nothing can stop me now, 'cause I don't care anymore.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by ViRaL1
    Judging from the writer list, only Panasonic, Samsung, JVC and Toshiba support DVD-RAM.
    You forget to mention LG! Probably LG has given up "-" development as well, it has 12x "+" rather than a 12x "-". LG also started with "-" and my LG GSM4020B is now dormant at my basement.

    Originally Posted by ViRaL1
    Another caveat, if you're a fan of the + format, you won't have any luck finding a standalone that supports + AND DVD-RAM.
    Yes! From a consumer point of view, it will be nice to have a standalone recorder to have all writing and reading capabilities, "+", "-", "RAM", CD-R, CD-RW, all in one and LiteOn LVW5005 has almost done it, except "RAM". Maybe, in another year, LiteOn will come out with an all format + a HDD, that will be perfect!

    We have media speed/price race, we have DVD writer format race, and prices dropped extremely fat and newer burners and media come out fast. With all these format competitions, we, consumers benefitted.

    Now Development of "-" is stagnant for almost 3 months now. Come on "-"!
    Sam Ontario
    Quote Quote  
  11. The Old One SatStorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Hellas (Greece), E.U.
    Search Comp PM
    I still burn at 4X and I don't feel that this gonna change anytime soon...
    I'll jump direct to 8x dual layer Discs when the time come
    Maybe next summer
    So it is dash for another year for me, at 4X speed.

    "Plus" gonna make me a costumer if the plus dual layer Discs gonna be 8X, made by T.Y. and cost less (not about the same) the dash discs
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member ViRaL1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Making the Rounds
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Sam Ontario
    Originally Posted by ViRaL1
    Judging from the writer list, only Panasonic, Samsung, JVC and Toshiba support DVD-RAM.
    You forget to mention LG! Probably LG has given up "-" development as well, it has 12x "+" rather than a 12x "-". LG also started with "-" and my LG GSM4020B is now dormant at my basement.
    Sorry, I was referring to standalones.

    LG DVD Recorders support DVD-VR but not DVD-RAM. I should have made myself more clear before.

    LG and Lite-On (along with one Zenith) make dual format standalones, but nobody covers all three bases as of yet. You can get +R/RW and -R/RW or -R/RW and RAM. I personally would opt for a tri-format burner (LG 4120b) with DVD+R/RW/-R/-RW/RAM with DVD+R DL and a standalone 4x DVD-R/3x DVD-RAM with 120GB HDD (Panasonic DMR-E85H).

    If only I had the money.
    Nothing can stop me now, 'cause I don't care anymore.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by SatStorm
    I still burn at 4X and I don't feel that this gonna change anytime soon...
    Most people including me, most of the media now using are at 4x. 8x are comparatively expensive. When prices of 8x dropped to the present 4x level, most people will shift to burn 8x and less 4x will be made available by then.

    It all boils down to prices.
    Sam Ontario
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=100902

    So Pioneer has done it! 16x +/-, and 4x DL!
    Sam Ontario
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member ViRaL1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Making the Rounds
    Search Comp PM
    I want one!!!
    Nothing can stop me now, 'cause I don't care anymore.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member jaxxboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    JAX, FL
    Search Comp PM
    I farted.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Hi Roderz,

    My brother gets them from a friend of his who works for a firm based in Leicester that sell computer-related items.

    The DVD-Rs is the format I buy & they are Datawrite Red V3 which write at 4x. My brother bought DVD+Rs which I don't know the make of because he returned them due to realising the incompatibility problem with his DVD Player.

    Both DVD-/+R cost £4.00 English/British Pounds Sterling for 25 Disks and they work very well with my Pioneer DVR-106/107 writer along with the programme Nero 6.3.

    Regards,

    Adam
    For Queen and Country!!!
    Quote Quote  
  18. I Think the debate about compatibillity en better or borse is useless.
    As I understand, the US is more DVD-R minded while here (holland) it's very hard to find a DVD-R compatible SA player.
    I Burn with a Lite-on 811S and with the new firmware and there booktype-tool I can change the booktype of the disk, even without Nero.

    In our sleepingroom there's a 5 year old DVDplayen which didn't play anything but original (did play CDR(W) of course...).
    Now, when I change the booktype-setting to DVD-ROM very hommade DVD works fine!!!

    Oh yeah.... Only DVD+R(W) booktypes van be changes with this tool. It's mot possible to change the booktypes on DVD-R(W)
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by Sam Ontario
    http://www.tomshardware.com/storage/20040707/dvd_recording-01.html
    I really don't come to that conclusion after reading the article, but I will say this:

    When it comes to recordable DVD, DVD-R is clearly superior to DVD+R.
    When it comes to rewritable DVD, DVD+RW is clearly superior to DVD-RW.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113
    What about this article? Any comments?
    Sam Ontario
    Quote Quote  
  21. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jbusser
    Oh yeah.... Only DVD+R(W) booktypes van be changes with this tool. It's mot possible to change the booktypes on DVD-R(W)
    This is because it already conforms to DVD-ROM specs.

    Originally Posted by Bodysurf
    When it comes to recordable DVD, DVD-R is clearly superior to DVD+R.
    When it comes to rewritable DVD, DVD+RW is clearly superior to DVD-RW.
    I agree, having used all these for so long.

    Originally Posted by Sam Ontario
    http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113
    What about this article? Any comments?
    This most recent article you linked to is useless. Theory doesn't mean squat if it cannot be seen in application. People don't care about fancy diagrams when the "better" only exists on paper.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  22. Originally Posted by ViRaL1
    If I'm not mistaken the DVD-VR and DVD+VR formats have similar features, but I believe compatibility is even lower in terms of which standalones support it. Also, DVD-RAM (at least in PC recorders) is available at up to 5x. The fastest I've seen in +RW or -RW is 4x. Another caveat, if you're a fan of the + format, you won't have any luck finding a standalone that supports + AND DVD-RAM.
    +VR and -VR have basically nothing in common.
    DVD-RAM is available in up to 5x speed yes (but no media available yet). However it's not CLV speed unlike 4x ±RW and usually DVD-RAM writers always verify the data so the effective speed is only the half making it slower than 2.4x DVD+RW. Still DVD-RAM is a nice format for some applications.
    BTW, 8x DVD+RW drives will be out in about a month or so.

    Originally Posted by lordsmurf
    This is because it already conforms to DVD-ROM specs.
    Huh, what are you talking about?

    Originally Posted by Bodysurf
    When it comes to recordable DVD, DVD-R is clearly superior to DVD+R.
    When it comes to rewritable DVD, DVD+RW is clearly superior to DVD-RW.
    That's a contradiction imho if you're talking about the technology.
    If you're talking about "practical useage" there's only one thing I can think of that makes DVD-R "superior" to DVD+R: The -R book type/disc category is more compatible than the default +R book type/disc category. Luckily "bitsetting" exists for +R which makes it just as compatible as -R or even slightly more compatible.

    Originally Posted by lordsmurf
    This most recent article you linked to is useless. Theory doesn't mean squat if it cannot be seen in application. People don't care about fancy diagrams when the "better" only exists on paper.
    Yeah I agree, if you don't have the technical knowledge to understand the article it's useless. Most objective people with in-depth knowledge will however agree that +R is better suited for high-speed burning.
    You start to see it in application too as more drive manufacturers release writers with faster +R speeds than -R and allows "overspeeding" of more +R media (ie 8x media to be written @12x etc.) such as BenQ, Hitachi-LG, Lite-On, Nu, OptoRite, Plextor and Toshiba.
    Still it's not impossible to achieve with -R too as Pioneer showed with the A08 although using crap ZCLV technology for 16x speed is a joke. It will be interesting to see how other companies not so dedicated to the -R format as Pioneer will succeed though? How will the burn quality and reliability be compared to +R @16x? Can CAV tech be used for 16x -R? Etc...
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member Marvingj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Death Valley, Bomb-Bay
    Search Comp PM
    I go both ways I'm a + & - man. I'm coming out of the closet. There are a lot of us in the world.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Originally Posted by -jsl-
    Originally Posted by Bodysurf
    When it comes to recordable DVD, DVD-R is clearly superior to DVD+R.
    When it comes to rewritable DVD, DVD+RW is clearly superior to DVD-RW.
    That's a contradiction imho if you're talking about the technology.
    If you're talking about "practical useage" there's only one thing I can think of that makes DVD-R "superior" to DVD+R: The -R book type/disc category is more compatible than the default +R book type/disc category.
    In general, DVD-R media is of higher quality than DVD+R. Pioneer, Maxell, Taiyo-Yuden, TDK and MCC all make great DVD-R media. Only MCC and Taiyo-Yuden (maybe RicohJapan?) make great DVD+R media.

    Originally Posted by -jsl-
    Luckily "bitsetting" exists for +R which makes it just as compatible as -R or even slightly more compatible.
    Yes, bitsetting exists. NO, it does not make DVD+R as, or more compatible, than DVD-R. "Bitsetting" is a hack or a cludge.

    Originally Posted by -jsl-
    Yeah I agree, if you don't have the technical knowledge to understand the article it's useless. Most objective people with in-depth knowledge will however agree that +R is better suited for high-speed burning.
    You start to see it in application too as more drive manufacturers release writers with faster +R speeds than -R and allows "overspeeding" of more +R media (ie 8x media to be written @12x etc.) such as BenQ, Hitachi-LG, Lite-On, Nu, OptoRite, Plextor and Toshiba.
    Burning media faster than its rated speed is a gamble, pure and simple. Like overclocking, I do not consider it any more than a marketing gimmick for people who do not value stability of their data.

    Originally Posted by -jsl-
    Still it's not impossible to achieve with -R too as Pioneer showed with the A08 although using crap ZCLV technology for 16x speed is a joke. It will be interesting to see how other companies not so dedicated to the -R format as Pioneer will succeed though? How will the burn quality and reliability be compared to +R @16x? Can CAV tech be used for 16x -R? Etc...
    We will see.

    I have no agenda here. My Pioneer DVR-A07 burns DVD+/-R +/-RW. The top quality DVD-R media is of higher quality than its DVD+R counterpart. DVD+RW works better than DVD-RW.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Originally Posted by Kamran
    Tom's Hardware Guide is an excellent site giving excellent reviews on product with back up of evidence, so they dont say ridiculous things lordsmurf
    I think the quote alone shows that its shite +RW the winner, my bollock
    If it's wet, drink it

    My DVD Collection
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member lacywest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    California
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by ViRaL1
    Just wait til 16x Dual Layer DVD*R/RW comes out. You'll all be sad and wishing you hadn't bought new burners!
    Paying $100 bucks for the new Lite-On [ Liteon 8X DVD±R / 4X DVD±RW, Retail and yes ... I have patched it ]... I got is okay for me. I can always pass it on to someone who can use it.

    I recently re-built a computer for a co-worker. She bitched about paying $303 dollars ... I bought the parts out of my own money. I was going to let her make payments to me. I had all the parts in my car trunk ... it was there for her eyes to see.

    She was going to get a new 2004 Tower, a MSI KM4M-L VIA KM400 333MHz Motherboard mATX, VGA, LAN and a AMD Duron 1.6 ghz CPU and a 40 gb Maxtor drive.

    But she whined about paying $303 dollars. So I returned everything to PCClub and used the parts I had laying around my apartment.

    So instead she got a tower that was built in 2000, a Jetway 542B AT mobo with a AMD K6-2 500 mhz CPU. [The CPU she did have was a AMD 300 Mhz]

    A $10 sound card. I did give her a Voodoo AGP Video card with 32 megs of video ram. [She did have a video card with 8 megs of video ram]

    She still has her original Quatum 8 gig hard drive and I threw in a Quatum 4.3 Gig hard drive for some extra hard drive space.

    And her CDROM drive ... it's built in 1996 and wont read my burnt CDs.

    So I used my Sony DRU 500AX DVD burner to install programs and took it out before I gave her the computer.

    All these parts came from my storage shed ... gathering dust.

    I tried to play a video encoded with Divx 5.11 and it paused and sputtered.

    So when she becomes computer savvy ... she will realize she don't have squat and should have accepted my deal.

    Hey she could have updated whenever she wanted too but oh no ... too expensive.

    So anyways my point is ... having an extra DVD-CD Burner around does come in handy.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by -jsl-
    Yeah I agree, if you don't have the technical knowledge to understand the article it's useless. Most objective people with in-depth knowledge will however agree that +R is better suited for high-speed burning.
    By this same logic I could say Nazi Germany was a great place ... and if you disagree, it means you simply do not understand it.

    Tomshardware lost credibility long ago. Many tests come up flawed, and some of them often seem to be rigged so certain hardware will be named a "winner" when real-world use would differ. I remember seeing AMD Duron tests outperforming Intel Pentium 4's one time. Load of shit.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  28. Tomshardware lost credibility long ago. Many tests come up flawed, and some of them often seem to be rigged so certain hardware will be named a "winner" when real-world use would differ. I remember seeing AMD Duron tests outperforming Intel Pentium 4's one time. Load of shit.
    Thats because a Duron CAN outperform a P4 of the same class depending on application used(gaming especially). Tom's hardware isn't the only site that showed this.

    I don't understand where the original author sees that Tom's said +R won the race. If you mean the speed race, at the time that this article was published, that would be true.[/b]
    Quote Quote  
  29. Originally Posted by lordsmurf
    This is because it already conforms to DVD-ROM specs.
    And that comes from the creator of nomorecoasters.com
    You stop me again whilst I'm walking and I'll cut your fv<king Jacob's off.
    Quote Quote  
  30. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by LanEvo7
    I don't understand where the original author sees that Tom's said +R won the race. If you mean the speed race, at the time that this article was published, that would be true.[/b]
    My third thread on July 9 explained it. I was peeping thru a hole inside an ivory tower, after seeing so many valuable information and different valid opinions.
    Sam Ontario
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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