DVD +R vs DVD-R

[RitualOfTheTrout]

So what format do you think is taking over? It might just be me but i seem to find it eaiser to find DVD+Rmedia around here, as well as more DVD +R recorders..

Of course the fact that DVD-R is harder to find could just mean more people are buying it.

I personally am hoping the DVD-R catches on, or at least both formats stay on the market. Considering all of the multi format recorders that seem to be showing up this seems more and more likely.

 

[Scared0o0Rabbit]

I have a multi format recorder (pioneer a06). I've never used anything but dvd-r discs, but they seem to work with everything so maybe that's the format that should stay.

 

[Alexvrb]

Again, DVD+ standard has some technical advantages. Google would help you a lot here. However, DVD- is compatible with more standalone players. I would still consider a multi-mode drive a must, as there really isn't a dominant standard.

I'm waiting until the new drives come out that can write to 8.5GB dual-layer DVD+Rs. That way I can 1:1 pirate all movies, just kidding...

 

[gameboy900]

Umm...dual layerd DVD+R's? Got a link to this fiction?

 

[racketboy]

I've read that dual layer is on it's way too -- from a reliable source -- just can't remember what one

 

[mal]

There are plenty of links out there, but none of them seem to link to a press release or any official web sites. *shrug*

 

[Alexvrb]

Originally posted by gameboy900@Nov 5, 2003 @ 04:28 AM

Umm...dual layerd DVD+R's? Got a link to this fiction?

That's really insulting. I don't mind the scepticism, but drop the all-knowing attitude.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/33733.html

more importantly

http://www.dvdrw.com/press/duallayer.htm

DVD-ROMs can and often *are* dual-layer. That's why you have 4.7 and 8.5GB raw capacities. The dual-layer DVD-ROM discs (not to be confused with dual-sided, where there's data on both sides of the disc and no label to speak of) have an opaque layer and a translucent layer. Until recently there was no way to duplicate this kind of disc with a DVD writer *and* keep compatibility with DVD standards.

 

[gameboy900]

We'll see how this works once it comes out. Until then I ain't holding my breath. And I'm sure that a DVD-R/RW version will be out too. Guess I gotta hold off getting that DVD burner till next year. Oh well. Hardly use my CD burner as is.

All knowing attitude? If I told you that Big Foot exists and provide no proof (the links which you shown have proved it to me, to a degree, and thanks) would you believe me? Especially when it comes to a topic that has generally been known to be near impossible or undoable.

 

[ExCyber]

BTW, relying on dvdrw.com as an authoritative source for anything other than organizational aspects of the DVD+RW Alliance is not the greatest idea, as they've been known to stretch the truth a bit (e.g. outdated info on -R/RW write speeds, promises of +R-supporting firmware updates for the initial +RW-only drives that AFAIK never materialized, their "more compatible" claim, etc.). I don't mean to say that they're lying about dual-layer being a reality; they probably aren't. However, I'm rather skeptical that the compatibility is as good as they're implying.

 

[Alexvrb]

I never said how compatible it would be. Frankly, I don't care as long as it isn't horrible. But I've already said that DVD-R is more compatible with standalone players than DVD+R, I'm not biased.

Gameboy: Nice comparison. Technology development, and a fairly logical one, vs. old myth. If DVD dual-layered discs had been talked about for years and years and people claimed they existed, but could still never prove it, then you've got something. This is a bit different, and its just that your choice of words were pretty insulting. You could have asked for links without essentially accusing me of lying. Wait, let me get you a link - GOOGLE.

 

[ExCyber]

I never said how compatible it would be.

No, but you did link to a press release from the DVD+RW Alliance site that made veiled compatibility claims, saying that it was more important than a far more pragmatically informative (less information, but more useful) article from an independent third party.

 

[Alexvrb]

No. It was more important because its better proof of its existance. Follow? Also, The Register did not mention compatibility at all. Again, neither did I. dvdrw.com can spin all they want, that doesn't make me responsible. I just give the links, its up to you to judge. I was concentrating on the fact that it EXISTS. You brought up compatibility, I wasn't even disagreeing with you! Besides, neither of us has anything in our hands to dispute/support their information with. So perhaps until then, we wait. If I were to GUESS, I'd say it'd be about as compatible as existing DVD+ standards as a technology, I do not know about early gen hardware.

 

[Trenton net]

DVD+R use the media format bit (or as DVD+R says, "Compatability" bit) to fool existing DVD players into thinking that its a dual layer media so that the laser can focus in on the data. Without it, most players read it like a regular DVD and won't pick it up. How the hell are they going to add a second layer now? Just getting their non-standard disks hacked to run on regular players was already a problem!