Myce.com Latest Updates

Why DVD+R(W) is superior to DVD-R(W)

Posted 23 June 2003 02:13 CET by Robin van Lieshout


Article Why DVD+R(W) is superior to DVD-R(W)
Date June 2003
Author Michael Spath

Since the war between DVD+R(W) and DVD-R(W) started, several comparisons of the two formats have been published, but none of those I read did contain really accurate technical information. Instead, journalists relied on public press releases and white papers provided by vendors to write their articles, resulting in the end into superficial explanations and sometimes contradictory conclusions.

The main problem here is that getting DVD+R(W) and DVD-R(W) standards require money and NDAs, so that little detailed technical information about these formats can be found on the Internet. This is very unfortunate, as it prevents both journalists and techies from all over the world to independently review, compare and choose the best format by themselves.

Because they cannot access the technical details (or simply due to laziness), some people prefer to carefully conclude that there's no real technical difference between the two formats, and that if you forget all the marketing propaganda + and - are equally good. To me this is an evidence that such people have not understood (or more probably not even read) the format specifications.

After having studied the two formats I found that there are several fundamental differences between them, and I concluded that + is superior to -. The goal of this paper is to present the technical details from the specifications that led me to this conclusion, so that anyone with basic engineering knowledge can make his own opinion. This article is by no mean exhaustive, and some exclusive + and - features (e.g. CAV writing or copyright management) are not tackled here because I considered them less significant. Note that this article is pretty technical, so some understanding of optical storage technologies is required.

Pre-pits versus ADIP

To help its recording, a blank disc usually gives 3 kind of information to the drive : tracking (so that the pits are correctly written along a track), addresses (so that the drive can write at the good location) and speed (so that the disc is spinned at the correct velocity). With CD-R(W), tracking and speed information are carried by the wobble, while addresses are contained in the ATIP data (Absolute Time In Pregroove, a frequency modulation of the wobble).

DVD-R(W) format uses a slow wobble (140,6kHz) for tracking and speed, and the addressing (and additional) information is carried by the land pre-pits (pre-recorded pits between grooves). On the groove signal, pre-pits give amplitude spikes.

DVD+R(W) format uses a much faster wobble (817,4kHz), and the addressing (and additional) information is carried by a phase modulation of this wobble called ADIP (ADdress In Pre-groove).

As taught by signal theory, the phase modulation method has a better noise immunity than the pre-pits method, and therefore ADIPs are generally more robust than LPPs against all external disturbances (electrical noise, disc tilting, focusing problems, etc). Apart from the usual sources of noise in a drive, a particularly annoying example of this problem occur when you are burning data on a DVD-R(W) and try to read the pre-pits information at the same time : because the light emitted by the burning laser is interfering with the reading beam, correct pre-pits detection is much more difficult to achieve, which can jeopardize linking precision.

But the pre-pit technology is not only a weakness against noise, it also becomes a limiting problem as the speed of the disc increases, because at high speeds pre-pits are more difficult to detect than phase inversions. Indeed, on the wobble signal the pre-pit information only exist where the pre-pit is located in time, while the information of phase inversion is spread over the complete inverted period of wobble (or more, actually as long as the phase is not inverted again). According to the specifications, the minimum length of a DVD-R(W) pre-pit is 1T (1/26.16E6 s), while a DVD+R(W) wobble period lasts 32T, which makes it much easier to detect.

Another bad side effect of this pre-pits method is that DVD-R(W) mastering is made more difficult than with DVD+R(W), since a higher precision is required to cut both the grooves and the pre-pits between them. Special dual-beam recorders are usually required for - stamper mastering, although some manufacturers now also use single beam cutting.

Not only are the pre-pits more error prone than phase modulation, but data they carry are also less protected. In one ECC block pre-pits carry 192 bits of information (one pre-pit block). Out of these 192 bits, 48 are not protected by any error correction mechanism, 24 bits are protected by 24 bits of parity (A parity), and the last 56 bits are also protected by 24 bits of parity (B parity). All in all, this strange heterogeneous structure finally gives a pretty weak protection to the information bits carried by pre-pits.

On the other hand the corresponding DVD+R(W) structure is 4 times smaller : one ADIP word is 52 bits large, consisting of 1 sync bit, 31 data bits and 20 parity bits (which protect all data bits). One ECC block contains 4 ADIP words, so 204 bits of information in total. Also each ADIP word contains the full ECC block address, while 4 times this size are needed in the - technology to extract this address : this gives significant speedups when seeking uses this method.

Defect management and recording quality

Another major advantage of DVD+RW format over DVD-RW (although no drive support it yet) is hardware defect management provided by the DVD+MRW standard (Mt Rainier for DVD+RW). On a DVD+MRW disc, when an error occur during a read or write access to an ECC block, this block is flagged as bad and the drive will not use it any more. Instead, when writing to the disc, data which should have been stored in this bad block are relocated elsewhere ; likewise, when the drive is asked to read these data again, it will fetch them from the new location. These operations are completely transparent for any software (whatever operating system, driver or burning application is used), and while the initiator is requesting consecutive sectors the drive will actually read data from various locations : this new abstraction layer is called Logical to Physical address translation.

As a side note, popular belief is that defect management is only useful when burning new discs (where data which are being written can also be read back, checked and moved to another location if needed), but that it is helpless on discs which get damaged after they have been burned. This is wrong, because when an ECC block is partially damaged and requires several retries to be read (or for instance give too many PI/PO errors), these data can proactively be moved to another clean location on the disc before media wear-out makes them unreadable. Of course, if an ECC block is damaged beyond error correction capabilities, data are definitely lost ; however, only very serious damages can make such a thing happen, as PI/PO correction can handle burst errors larger than 6 mm.

As with formatting, DVD+RW standard enables background verifications, i.e. the disc is checked for defects when the drive is idle. Of course, at any time the user can still read or write to the disc, or eject it from the drive ; background verification would then resume later from where it was stopped. Combining these features together gives a very powerful system which can continuously try to improve the longevity of discs : while the user performs its usual operations, the drive can check in the background the complete surface of the disc and move data from damaged locations to clean areas. Such advanced use of defect management are already described in the DVD+MRW specification, for instance with the Self Monitoring Analysis and Reporting Technology (SMART, a technology inspired from hard discs). Finally, it is important to mention that DVD+MRW provides full read-only compatibility for players which don't understand MRW.

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.

Also a DVD+R(W) disc allows a drive to achieve better writing quality (independently of media quality), because it gives more information to a drive than a DVD-R(W). Indeed, just like with CD-R(W), the best writing settings for a given disc are found at startup during the OPC (Optimum Power Control) algorithm, which use data contained in the pre-pits blocks/ADIP words. And regarding OPC, a DVD+R(W) gives not only more information (e.g. power dependency on wavelength) but also more precise ones (e.g. startup laser power). Moreover, all these information are available for 4 different speed ranges (primary and upper speeds, normal and 4x+ mode), while - format only provides one set of data. This is very important because optimal writing settings are very sensitive to burning speeds. Also the OPC test area of DVD+ is 32768 sectors in total, compared to 7088 sectors for DVD-.

Linking

When for any reason writing on the disc has been stopped and is resumed, new data have to be linked with the old ones. Linking is a very important and tricky task, which can cause various problems both at physical and logical level. First, a short overview of the linking methods used by the two formats is required.

With DVD-R(W), 3 different linking methods can be used : 2K linking, 32K linking, and loss-less linking. In all cases recording has to stop 16 bytes after the first sync of the first sector of an ECC block, and new data are recorded starting between the 15th and the 17th byte of this same frame. The precision of the linking is therefore 2 bytes and the space waste either 2KB, 32KB or nothing (note that loss-less linking method does not work with DVD-R for Authoring). With DVD+R(W), linking is performed in the last 8 channel bits (4 data bits) of an ECC block. Linking precision is therefore 4 times higher and loss-less linking is the only method allowed by the standard, which guarantees no space waste.

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. With +RW, the linking region is in the last byte of PI correction, which leaves user data bytes untouched. Also the linking position guarantees that all syncs in the next ECC block will be corrected spaced, which gives at least one sync frame less to correct for the player compared to -RW. Note that with +RW, corrections due to the linking region and corrections due to the sync shift are split between two ECC blocks, while they must all be performed by a single ECC block with -RW.

Linking can also cause various troubles at physical level, and when looking directly at the HF signal read by the PUH, the linking region looks like the following:

The slicing level is the digital threshold which separates zeroes from ones, and therefore it must always be centred in the HF signal for good reading quality : when the slicing level deviates too much from its perfect position, the run-lengths (3T to 14T) are wrongly recognized, which causes decoding errors. But as explained previously linking is not perfectly accurate, and therefore a gap will always exist between the two recorded sessions, and the longer the gap, the further the slicing level can drift. Furthermore, between the two linked regions the slicing level can also differ, because of various physical parameters which could have changed between the two recording sessions (laser power, media properties, recording speed, etc) : when this jump is too high, again errors appear. So the smaller the gap and the jump, the better quality and compatibility we get : -RW allows a 32T large linking gap and does not care about this slicing level jump, while +RW allows a 8T large linking gap and a maximum limit for this jump under any condition. This makes +RW loss-less linking also more powerful at physical level.

Multiple recording sessions and compatibility

If you want to partially record a DVD-R(W) disc and use it immediately, but also want to be able to record more data later, border zones are used, which are meant to make this partially recorded disc compatible with standard DVD-ROM players. So every -R(W) recording session has to start with a border-in area (except the first one, which starts with the lead-in) and stop with a border-out area.

However, the size of these border zones is quite amazing : 32 to 96 MB for the first zone, then 6 to 18 MB for the next ones. This means that a disc containing 3 recorded sessions can require up to 132 MB (more than 2% of the complete storage capacity) just for separating these regions. Furthermore, the border-out and border-in areas have to be linked together, using one of the 3 methods (and the possible associated problems) explained previously. Note also that for some unknown reason a border-out is needed before the lead-out, while the first border-in is replaced by the lead-in.

On the other hand, when multiple recording sessions are used on a DVD+R(W) disc, Intro and Closure zones are used (the counterpart of border-in and border-out), but they are always 2 MB large : therefore, with + format, a 3 sessions disc always uses only 4 MB to delimit the regions (the lead-out replaces the last Closure zone). Also a nice feature of multi-sessions implementation on DVD+R(W) is that one can use a session to reserve space, i.e. sectors which are left unrecorded (this blank area is called Reserved Fragment). Thus, additional data can be recorded in next sessions while the first one will only be written later : this can be useful for instance when a precise location on the disc has to contain file system tables, which can only be filled after all the files have been written to the disc.

Compatibility is a very sensitive topic when comparing the two technologies, but independently of media, recorders and players quality, some logical causes of incompatibility can be noted. Indeed, both recordable formats use values in the lead-in structures which were forbidden or reserved in the first DVD-ROM specification (e.g. disc structure, recording density, etc) and which can cause compatibility failures on some old or particularly picky players.

A famous example of such logical incompatibility is the "Book Type" field, which indicates the type of the disc. The first DVD-ROM specification only allowed 0 (i.e. read-only) to be written there, but later each recordable format defined its own value to identify itself ; unfortunately it turned out that some players simply refuse to read a disc with a non-zero value. To handle this problem, the latest DVD+R standard specifically authorizes to write a zero Book Type for compatibility reasons, and nowadays many drive manufacturers have made this bit programmable. But this cannot be done for DVD-R(W), as the Book Type (with several other information in the lead-in) are pre-embossed (i.e. pre-recorded) on blank media. Note however that although it reduces compatibility, this pre-recorded Book Type also improves copy-protection security, as it enables any player to easily identify a DVD-R(W) disc.

An additional compatibility risk exist with DVD-(W) in the user data area and is introduced by the 2K/32K linking methods. Indeed, the linking sectors used with these methods must use a special data type to be differentiated from normal data sectors, and this value was not allowed in the original DVD-ROM specification. There's no known study about the impact of this field on compatibility, but sector headers are a vital part of the decoding process, and therefore it is always safer to keep them fully compliant with the strictest DVD-ROM standard.

Conclusion

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). And although some serious efforts have been put in the latest revisions of the - format to fix some of the original problems (at the cost of a much increased complexity), it still remains technically inferior to +, due to some intrinsic weaknesses (e.g. pre-pits). This is not very surprising, as Sony and Philips have a much longer experience at defining standards than Pioneer (and several key patents), and they also had the advantage to publish their standards after their competitors.

Although the arguments presented in this document might look like technical details to most readers, disc format is what defines the limits of what drives can do with a given medium, both in terms of performances and features. Therefore, the technical advantages of the DVD+R(W) format will with time turn into faster, more powerful and more reliable drives for end users. This is already the case today, and the gap will continue to increase as DVD+R(W) drives will exploit more and more of the advantages of the + format. However, as history showed, the best ideas are not guaranteed to win on technology markets, and only time will tell which format becomes the new standard.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the engineers from Pioneer Japan and Philips Netherlands who reviewed early versions of this article for their most useful corrections and comments (note that this only means that these people kindly contributed to the technical correctness of the article, not that they - or their company - agree with my conclusions of this article). Also many thanks to J.W. Aldershoff for having suggested and organized these reviews, and for hosting this article.

Disclaimer

This article is meant to be a list of technical arguments showing some of the advantages of the + format over the - format, and it reflects only my personal opinion, and not the one of CD Freaks. It is not a detailed comparison of the two formats, and it does not take into account specificities of drives, media or third party software : only the format differences are compared here, as described in the DVD-R 2.0, DVD-RW 1.1, DVD+R 1.1 and DVD+RW 1.1 standards. Corrections are welcome by email, but questions and contradictory opinions should be posted to our forum, so that everyone can benefit from an open discussion.

Michael Spath - spath@cdfreaks.com


Ian@CDRLabs.com
CD Freaks Member
Posted on: 23 Jun 03 00:40
Hasn't hardware based defect management been a feature of the DVD+RW format since day one?
0 Agree

ckin2001
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 23 Jun 03 09:11
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.
0 Agree

Ian@CDRLabs.com
CD Freaks Member
Posted on: 23 Jun 03 11:42
If thats the case, then every drive manufacturer out there has been falsely advertising this feature since the first DVD+RW drive was announced.
0 Agree

alexnoe
CDFreaks Resident
Posted on: 23 Jun 03 16:21
Indeed...I see a large gap between what dvd+rw is capable of, and what dvd+rw drives nowadays can do...
0 Agree

buzzy
New on Forum
Posted on: 23 Jun 03 21:25
You would hope DVD+R is a better format, as they had the benefit of seeing what -R could do. This article is interesting and a start, but the bottom line on what it means to an end user isn't clear. Not surprisingly, it's probably not a compelling difference for many. The real issue is which things are relevant to an end user. Those get a little lost in the article, but they include: - Better ECC - Better power calibration info - Better linking - Less space lost in multiple writes The compelling item, defect management, isn't all that relevant - who would really use RW? RW isn't a stable medium. Unfortunately starting with the physical aspects (especially pits), no matter how much better you believe it to be, isn't entirely convincing by itself - it's only several processing stages later that data gets delivered from a drive. That is, you have to evaluate the net effect on the whole chain (from data to write to read to data). Looking at what happens at the physical level by itself isn't all that informative, as ECC is there to offset the physical issues.
[edited by buzzy on 23.06.2003 23:39]
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 24 Jun 03 19:13
> That is, you have to evaluate the net effect on the whole chain > (from data to write to read to data). Looking at what happens at > the physical level by itself isn't all that informative, as ECC > is there to offset the physical issues. The point here was to show that linking problems on - format can be caused by inferior design at two independent levels (logical and physical), whose bad effects are summed. I agree that it would have been more interesting with figures showing the impact of this physical effect, but I could not obtain those.
0 Agree

comomolo
New on Forum
Posted on: 26 Jun 03 15:41
I don't quite get this. Philips says its drives are Mt. Rainier compatible. Is this not the same thing as having defect management built in? Isn't DVD-MRW just about that?
0 Agree

Kenshin
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 28 Jun 03 21:54
What Philips drives? What does not have built-in Defect Management? DVD-MRW or DVD+MRW?
0 Agree

TexasGuy
CD Freaks Member
Posted on: 22 Jul 03 18:31
Ain't Pioneer A06 has Defect Management? I think it does.
0 Agree

dvdendec
New on Forum
Posted on: 08 Aug 03 14:55
What are technical disadvantages of DVD+ compared to DVD- format?
0 Agree

DVDFreaktron
New on Forum
Posted on: 15 Sep 03 11:43
The way I heard it, DVD -R and -RW were designed to be most compatible with stand-alone DVD players. Precisely how are +R and +RW superior with regard to playback in stand-alone DVD players, if they are, compared to -R and -RW? :X
0 Agree

archer10
New on Forum
Posted on: 16 Sep 03 02:32
I don't think this point should be underestimated. I think it is misleading for Spath to criticize compatibilty based on players barfing over unexpected reserved fields, but not mention that the reason that logical layer enhancements like defect management were deliberately avoided in DVD-R was to maintain compatibility with existing players (pre VD+.) Players that barf over unexpected values or non-zero reserved fields are likely to be in violation of the spec anyway. I don't have the specs, but it is common for technical specs to recommend that reserved fields or unexpected values be ignored in most cases. The exception to this would be a field whose specific purpose is to declare an incompatible change. Can I also object to the "plus" and "minus" framing? It's an unpronounced hyphen in DVD-R. Officially, the VD+ formats aren't even DVDs, because the Forum does not endorse them. So the dual connonation of DVD+R as (a) a DVD and (b) better than a "minus" is highly misdirectional. It is only "better" if your evaluation criteria completely excludes compatibility.
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 26 Sep 03 23:49
The only advantage of - over + that I could find is copyright management : thanks to its pre-embossed informations, DVD-R(W) discs can be made much more difficult to copy. I asked Pioneer for more ideas but did not get any answer ; anyone who knows such advantage of - over + is welcome to mail me.
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 26 Sep 03 23:54
Mainly because of linking and bit-settings (see the corresponding parts of the aticle). Note that DVD+R(W) have been created after their - counterpart, and they were certainly not designed to be less compatible.
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 27 Sep 03 00:16
> I don't think this point should be underestimated. I think it is misleading for > Spath to criticize compatibilty based on players barfing over unexpected reserved > fields, but not mention that the reason that logical layer enhancements like > defect management were deliberately avoided in DVD-R was to maintain compatibility > with existing players (pre VD+.) It's easy to claim afterwards that you willingly did not include a feature you did not think about AT THAT TIME. Besides, which compatibility problems are you talking about ? > Players that barf over unexpected values or non-zero reserved fields are likely > to be in violation of the spec anyway. I don't have the specs, but it is common for > technical specs to recommend that reserved fields or unexpected values be ignored > in most cases. The exception to this would be a field whose specific purpose is to > declare an incompatible change. With these disc specs, reserved usually mean "must be filled with zeroes". The book type definition Oof DVD-ROM standard gives a number of authorized values but does not explicitely say what to do when other values are read. > Can I also object to the "plus" and "minus" framing? It's an unpronounced hyphen in > DVD-R. Officially, the VD+ formats aren't even DVDs, because the Forum does not > endorse them. So the dual connonation of DVD+R as (a) a DVD and (b) better than > a "minus" is highly misdirectional. It is only "better" if your evaluation criteria > completely excludes compatibility. Luckily I'm typing and not talking, so you cannot know how I pronounce "DVD-R"
0 Agree

dvdendec
New on Forum
Posted on: 28 Sep 03 12:59
A Wobble frequency for DVD+RW is too close to the channel bit frequency. 14T is the longest signal in the 8-16 modulation (EFM plus) and DVD+RW wobble is 16T in its half period. They are so close that the circuit has difficulty to separate them clearly. That is, the wobble signal can be distorted easily after writing on the DVD+RW disc. On the other hand, wobble frequency of DVD-R/RW is 93T in its half period and it's far from the 14T channel bit signal. It's easier to separate the main channel signal and the wobble signal from the signals from an optical pickup. The quality of the wobble signal is very crucial when the drive starts writing from the link point (at the gap). The wobble signal has to be so clear, without distortion and little jitter as possible, because it generates the writing channel bit clock via a PLL. But in the DVD+RW specification, it employs the lossless linking as a mandatory function. This allows only very small linking position error of the gap tolerance, i.e. so severe. It seems so harder to meet the required error/gap length of the link position than the DVD-R/RW system, especially when it comes to higher writing speed environment. Do you agree?
0 Agree

dvdendec
New on Forum
Posted on: 28 Sep 03 15:52
Hmmm, Philips (DVDRW416K, I believe it's the latest product at present) nor Ricoh don't seem to support DVD+MRW or EasyWrite for DVD+RW, supports only Mt Rainier for CD-RW. On the other hand, current Pioneer DVR-A06-J already supports DRT-DM : Destributed Real-time Defect Management that achives Prescision Recording Technology. Anyway, Microsoft already announced that the defect management would be supported in the Device Driver level in the coming Windows OS Longhorn due in 2005, for any of DVD-RW, DVD+RW and DVD-RAM defect management.
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 03 Oct 03 23:55
The wobble quality is important indeed, but noy that much for the writing clock, which can be nicely generated even from a damaged wobble by adding a few tricks to the standard PLL. From my experience the most difficult part is address (LPP/ADIP) tracking, and I always found that reading LPP on a burned part or while burning a - disc was much more difficult than reading ADIP on a + one. And from my own tests + linking is still in practice much more precise than the 8 bits allowed by the standard, even at 8x. But in the end it all depends on the chipsets, and yours may behave differently from those I have tested.
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 04 Oct 03 00:02
Yes, until +MRW is actually used in a drive DRT-DM is the best defect management system you can get. Note, however, that nothing in theory prevents + format to use DRT-DM/UDF2.0 too, while Mount Rainier will always be forbidden to - drives.
0 Agree

dvdendec
New on Forum
Posted on: 02 Nov 03 17:09
Yea, I agree, LPP Address would be harder to read while recording. But I'm wondering if reading LPP address while recording is meaningful. I mean, if you have noticed you are on the wrong track by reading LPP address, you've already burnt the wrong track. It's too late. Maybe monitoring the wobble would be reasonable? Actually, I think even -R/-RW drives have the loss-less linking feature, which has to be a pretty small link error such as 8 bits or less. Anyway, I agree it depends on the chipsets, and its OPU as well :g
0 Agree

dvdendec
New on Forum
Posted on: 02 Nov 03 17:16
Oh, great, +RW to use DRT-DM is possible indeed! But isn't Mt Rainier for -RW drives possible, at least, -RW discs in dual format drives? What forbid Mt Rainier on -RW discs?
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 13 Nov 03 21:39
Because some regions of the lead-in which are needed for Mt Rainier are already used by -R(W) format for something else.
0 Agree

MaverickMitchell
CD Freaks Junior Member
Posted on: 15 Oct 04 08:25
Someone said "RW isn't a stable medium". Why is that? Please, someone explain. Thank you.
0 Agree

An Nord Draoi
New on Forum
Posted on: 30 Dec 04 11:34
You will be lucky if anyone bothers to explain that one. The poisonous words (rightfully) directed toward the RW format/discs is all over the Internet. Do a search via Google or at CDFreaks itself if you want to read any of it. It is a lot simpler to just accept that RW is not a good format. Besides, who *needs* RW? It is overpriced and a fringe-use format mainly found in specialised applications, not general usage.
0 Agree

TuDo
New on Forum
Posted on: 05 Jan 05 20:10
I have 3 stand-alone DVD players. I burned one -R and one+R. The +R can be read by all 3 players, The -R can be read by only one player. Which one is better ? I think we have the right answer.
0 Agree

[H]itman
CDFreaks Resident
Posted on: 07 Jan 05 02:56
I'm a +R with bitsetting user and I have found that for me it is the most compatible. However, in a thread where we were discussing DVD+R vs. DVD-R someone posted the following: "Also DVD+R uses high frequency wobbles for addressing (same as CD-R) while DVD-R uses LPPs. The demerit of using wobble for addressing is that the Pickup of your player can easily read the wobble next to the one it should read. A mag in japan has made some test about this and some DVD+R with a 100 min long movie got played back in only 95minutes because the Player skipped tracks because it got lost in the wobbles." Most of your article goes over my head, but to someone who doesn't know much about this stuff, the above quote (at face value) makes sense. My question is.. is there any truth to that?(the quote) Can the high frequency wobbles of DVD+R cause problems when playing back video?
0 Agree

abn104
New on Forum
Posted on: 28 Jan 05 05:03
Regarding RW stability and usage: Speeds are now much higher, prices are lower, and stability has apparently improved, especially with the new A-SERL technology that minimizes re-write degradation. For those who don't have a DVD-RAM drive and need to make regular backups of frequently changed data, as well as burn DVD +/-R, RW can be useful.
0 Agree

spath
Optical storage technical expert
Posted on: 06 Feb 05 19:08
No, that's completely wrong. It is much easier to miss a pre-pit than to miss a wobble period : as I explained, pre-pits are merely an amplitude modulation trick, while wobble phase inversions are very robust. Furthermore, if you misdetect only one pre-pit you can see a sync instead of a data bit, which makes -R format much more prone to sync errors.
0 Agree

bateman2006
New on Forum
Posted on: 19 Dec 05 02:16
That was a great read! I was lied to by someone at one of the retail chains, then. I was searching for a DVD recorder, and finally decided on the Pioneer DVR-225S. I was told, by someone at one of the chains, that DVD- is becomming MORE popular and more common in units. In all the units i saw a year ago, when i bought my unit, DVD+ format was more prevalent. I always found it odd that when I use DVD+ media in my computer's burner, it always has to format the disc. When using DVD-, i never get a message in the software that the disc needs formatting. I, along with everyone else, thanks you for clearing this confusion up. Now, the makers of DVD+ need to exploit such information so they can sell more units. LOL
0 Agree

FreqNasty
Banned
Posted on: 19 Dec 05 06:20
Fact is, dvd-r is more compatible than non dvdrom booktype dvd+r but dvd+R set to booktype dvdrom is more compatible than dvd-r. Anyway, compatibility issues are only apparant on old dvd players and usually that was using dvd+r discs not bitset, I've never had a dvd-r that hasn't worked on an old player. All new dvd players have been tweaked to play all formats, even dvd+r not bitset to dvdrom.
0 Agree

russzero
New on Forum
Posted on: 05 Jan 06 14:00
hi .. this was a good read. I too was under the impression that DVD-r(w) was better than +r(w). Reading your expalnation was interesting. About 3mnths ago i got our 1st stand alone DVD recorder that handles all formats. Ive tried just one +r disk & was ok untill i went to finalise it. I could NOT finalise untill i removed the titles id set prior to this. !! very strange. Ive had a failure rate of about one in very six disks using DVD-r. So now i shall try using +r disks & see wether this improves. Thanks again for some very helpfull info. russ
0 Agree

Chen Goldberger
New on Forum
Posted on: 28 Apr 06 16:28
I've heard the DVD+R has a 16 tracks limit, while all other formats including DVD+RW is 99 tracks. Is this true? Chen
0 Agree

Ixrec
New on Forum
Posted on: 22 Dec 06 23:01
I'm no expert at formats, but it sounds like DVD-R has only two noticable advantages over DVD+R. 1) compatibility with older players 2) better "copyright protection" Since all the questions I know of (and a lot more) about the advantages of DVD+R have been asked and answered to my satisfaction, I only have questions regarding the advantages of DVD-R. 1) is that only from before DVD+R was invented? If so, when was that? 2) What exactly is this copyright protection? the copyright of the DVD-R makers? of yourself? of whatever company made what you're burning to the disc? Finally, if I missed something else good about DVD-Rs please mention it. P.S. if you're wondering, this article and its reactions are the only info I currently have on the debate. And at home I've only used DVD+R so far (they were on sale when I needed blank DVDs ).
0 Agree

Ixrec
New on Forum
Posted on: 22 Dec 06 23:26
I'm no expert at formats, but it sounds like DVD-R has only two noticable advantages over DVD+R. 1) compatibility with older players 2) better "copyright protection" Since all the questions I know of (and a lot more) about the advantages of DVD+R have been asked and answered to my satisfaction, I only have questions regarding the advantages of DVD-R. 1) is that only from before DVD+R was invented? If so, when was that? 2) What exactly is this copyright protection? the copyright of the DVD-R makers? of yourself? of whatever company made what you're burning to the disc? Finally, if I missed something else good about DVD-Rs please mention it. P.S. if you're wondering, this article and its reactions are the only info I currently have on the debate. And at home I've only used DVD+R so far (they were on sale when I needed blank DVDs ).
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 13 Feb 07 21:11
Thanks for the info! From now on I'll buy + media for backups and - media for general distribution video DVDs.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 25 Mar 07 09:15
The Defect Management System is a great disadvantage of DVD+RW. If you will try to read a DVD+RW in a worn-out drive it will try to "improve" the disc and your data will be lost.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 25 Mar 07 10:39
That's interesting. Is that what's just started to happend with my Philips DVDR75? I always use DVD+RW's and they have just staretd to become corrupted when trying to play, not record. I'm just in the process of buying a Sony replacement with 80GB hard disc & Freeview (UK).
0 Agree

ptch
New on Forum
Posted on: 12 Apr 07 21:30
All data in DVD-R are protected by an error correction code, see standard ECMA-359, Section 18, ECC Block configuration: “An ECC Block is formed by arranging 16 consecutive Scrambled Frames in an array of 192 rows of 172 bytes each, see Figure 27. To each of the 172 columns, 16 bytes of Parity of Outer Code are added, then, to each of the resulting 208 rows, 10 byte of Parity of Inner Code are added. Thus a complete ECC Block comprises 208 rows of 182 bytes each.” (http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/ECMA-359.pdf)
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 25 May 07 16:21
Very interesting. I'm planing to buy an external DVD burner (Plextor PX-755uf). It supports both - and + r medias. I'm also interested in DL burning for backups. I noticed that -R DL media is harder to find than the -R DL's. Does anyone have experience DL Burning and if so, does DL media follow "the same" restrictions/benefits mentioned in this Review/Forum/Blog? Feel Free to email me. Thanks.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 06 Jun 07 21:49
i backed up my works in the DVD+R (by www.cdv.it) back then in italy before i came back to america. and now, all my computers have problem reading the DVDs. Does anyone know what is happened? Any chance to get back all my saved data from the DVDs in other methods?
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 07 Jul 07 11:02
Thanks for an interesting and demystifying article. In practical terms though I wondered if there are any true scientific comparison tests? The collection of general observations like "I tried this and so and so was better" is meaningless as it must depend on quality of disks which in my experience varies greatly, not to mention intrinsic bias. Only a proper comparison can reveal which format is more widely playable and/or safer for long term data storage.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 10 Jul 07 18:55
Anyone have an idea why my pc will not read DVD-R discs even when I've tried 2 different,new drives and they both read every other format supported? My pc just looks at DVD-R's and then tries to read them as a CD. This is with blank or written DVD-R's
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 22 Jul 07 23:01
I have just bought a new dvd camcorder -- cannon dc201 Thinking the formats are virtually identical bought 5 sony dvd+rw discs -- totally useless . the camcorder can`t see the discs let alone prepare them. Why don`t shop staff tell you these things instead of you finding out when you open the box and read the book. Fifteen quid wasted on wrong format dvd`s.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 04 Aug 07 01:37
I want to copy some home VCR and 8 mm tapes to DVD format and then be able to edit out scenes that I do not want to save. I ahve way too many hours of family tapes and want to save the best parts on DVD I have a Sony DVC/VCR recorder model # RDR-VX500. The instruction manual indicates that editing out part of recorded scene can only be done with DVD-RW's in VR mode. It cannot be done with DVD+RW's. I want to able to play back the edited DVD-RW's and probably be able to make extra copies of the edited versions to give to my fanily members for them to keep and play. I know play back will work on my Sony, but it may not work on other DVD players. In order to make extra copies I would need play the edited DVD-RW from another DVD player be able copy it on my SONY. Anybody ever done this and know how it works? Maybe a PC can help somehow.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 13 Aug 07 00:44
There is no right or wrong in choosing your more-efficient media here. But the main concern should lies on 'will the dvd work for him/her or them?' The price is both DVD+r and -r had come to rock bottom for the last 2 years, why not have a couple of both? Ask your customer(your uncle joe or grand-mary) what type of player do they have and then make your decision? DKB: dvd-conversion is better done with a computer. It's a time-consuming process, but your efforts will turn those dvds to be family heirloom. Apple software is technically-customized for video editing(all-in-one), while PC has better access to different softwares. * Nothing beats an '1x speed' home-made dvd-R compatiblilty on dvd-players. Cheers!
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 13 Aug 07 08:54
I saw a car DVD player with compatibility as DVD+R. This means, it will not play the DVD-R disc?
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 26 Aug 07 12:38
dear friends i cannot watch dvd+r in my pc. i have dvd recorder that works with dvd+r/ is it possible to watch it in my pc? is it nessecary to downloan a sofrware? tks to your reply eli
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 18 Sep 07 21:12
aloooooo :g :g :g :g :+ :S
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 19 Sep 07 15:58
Good survey btw, but personally, DVD+R is not better in all cases. I agree that DVD+R may be ever so slightly better technically, (at a physical level somewhere) "BUT" DVD+R doesn't always meet my needs. I like to make an exact backup copy of my DVD's periodically. On more than a few high-quality Video concerts on DVD I had to use DVD-R to make my backup copy. If I tried using DVD+R the copy would freeze all the time after half-way thru the concert, or it wouldn't play at all. -The above also was the same whether I use my external DVD player, or my PC using (Pioneer DVD-212). I wish I knew why this was so ? (maybe the original DVD was mastered on DVD-R ?, ...) In any case I wish they would have "STANSARDS" in place ie. DVD +/- R -this would obviously make it much simpler for the consumer, the prices would be cheaper, and all the competeing manufacturers' would have to agree on the next standard before selling their wares. -Alas, that doesn't make "cents" for all those manufacturers', and not much competition technically. Anyway DVD-R looks and feels the same as DVD+R for all my purposes. -and just to make us spend 4x as much $, we'll also soon need Blu-Ray and HD capability
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 23 Sep 07 16:08
dvd+r may burn slightly faster then dvd-r by a few sec but that's the only advantage it has
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 15 Oct 07 00:57
Please advise, can i copy a DVD+R on a DVR-R ?
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 23 Oct 07 06:50
p.suresh my attach ment for u ............ Tirupur .............
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 01 Nov 07 12:29
The question by Sam about copying a DVD+R onto a DVD-R. Yes is the answer. Use nero and copy the disk to the computer hard drive and then copy it to a blank disk. dab
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 01 Nov 07 22:47
Hello,I don't understand anything you guys talkin about ,but I have lil question: I have dvd+r dl rom , and I bought dvd-r cds....will my rom burn these cds..or I should change them for +? thanks for your reply.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 19 Nov 07 09:18
I agree that on paper the + format looks technically superior, at least to a well educated lay person, assuming that the information presented is actually true. But paper is one thing and real life products in the shops are another. As regards Mount Rainier - in practise this does not exist in 99.9% of the mainstream DVD drives on the market even today. A few CD drives supported it, but not many. It is also hardly ever mentioned. Lets face it, this standard died four years ago and the corpse is already full of worms. R.I.P Mt Rainier. So far as I know, without Mt Rainier, many of the more compelling advantages of the + format remain unused. As for RW discs, I fail to see what is wrong with them. I have a few RW discs which I use to hold TV recordings temporarily until I have watched them, as you would a video tape. They give me no problems even after years of repeated use. Some discs which have old recordings (many years) play perfectly. I have had more trouble with write once than I ever have with RW.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 01 Dec 07 00:50
How does this affect the longevity of the disks? Ok, I get that DVD-R is inferior in the coding scheme for something to do with the file structure at the beginning and the way the track is stabilized when writing, but suppose I record a disk, DVD-R or DVD+R, and it's perfect. All the data verifies, there isn't a single bit error on the disk. Is one more likely to be unreadable after 30 years than the other? That is, the way each degrades over time, which one will be more robust against the effects of time which ultimately cause failure? Something else you said made me wonder - my computer is on the verge of failing (and I'm backing up stuff on DVDs because not just my hard drive but I think my CPU are misbehaving) - but during the record process, it can't keep up with itself - the buffer hits zero, the recording temporarily stops, the LED on the drive goes out, and then a few seconds later it resumes. Now, you go in depth with this loss-less, 2 kB and 32 kB track resumption stuff - but what has me concerned, is that if I fill up a DVD completely to the brim - so that there's no free space for gratuitous 32 kB splurges of additional space used - how is this working? Even if it says 'data verification completed successfully' is there some hidden cost to the disk and the long-term viability of the data as a result of it continously stopping and resuming?
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 19 Dec 07 14:10
dfdsf
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 26 Dec 07 21:16
WHO CARES!!!!!!!!! SERIOUSLY! THEY WILL BOTH GIVE YOU WHAT YOU WANT. YOU LIKE DVD+R'S? BUY +R THEN! YOU LIKE -R? BUY THEM THEN! You guys are ridiculous with your huge pointless arguements. Buy what you like, who cares what the other people think!
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 02 Jan 08 11:06
Yo Mike, Relax man... I Charge 100$ per hour or you can easilly to it by yourself... just relax man.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 03 Jan 08 19:31
Well if you're after compatibility you can't beat DVD-. But if you want to be sure of no errors then go DVD+. Thing is, I have had a DVD- for a while now and with either R or RW discs I haven't had a single error. Most PC drives come with some sort of burn proofing. If you are paranoid of errors then go DVD+ but come on, how often do you get these, realistically? At least DVD- can be read in *any* DVD-ROM or DVD-VIDEO drive. I personally wish DVD-RAM was more widespread because you can timeslip recording on it (watch previous data whilst recording at the same time!). But that went the way of betamax.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 03 Jan 08 19:33
....or maybe I'm just lucky in having no errors lol
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 03 Jan 08 19:40
And it's not just Pioneer that have interests in DVD-. You forgot the other electronics giants involved including Samsung, Panasonic (after the decline of RAM), JVC and advocates including that little known software firm Microsoft :X
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 26 Jan 08 22:05
look, i don't know the technicall difference between + and -. i bought some +rw's for a private video burning venture for semi-mass distribution. perfect. not a glitch. 15 minutes and a full dvd was done. i ran out of dvd+rw's and bought some dvd-rw's, not knowing there was a difference, and i have yet to find a dvd-rw that didn't screw up royally in the burning process and scrap a dvd-rw. someone told me then there was a difference, so now i am going to abandon the -rw's and pick up some +rw's to finish my project. i will post again when +rw blows -rw out of the water. by the way, the grammar in this article stunk to high heaven.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 03 Feb 08 23:36
NO PICS IN ARTICLE !!!!
0 Agree

qwertzuiop
CD Freaks Rookie
Posted on: 23 Feb 08 01:26
This article is very theoretical, it doesn't touch the biggest issue in real world: bad compatibility. if +R(W) or -R(W) is better depends mainly on the drive, i.E. w/ my Samsung SH-203B I had problems w/ DVD+R/RW media, but no problems w/ -R/RW media.
0 Agree

An Fear Glas
New on Forum
Posted on: 20 Mar 08 17:35
It is amazing that people are still commenting on an article that is five years old. :B
0 Agree

An Fear Glas
New on Forum
Posted on: 20 Mar 08 17:35
It is amazing that people are still commenting on an article that is five years old. :B
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 30 Apr 08 20:31
I still dont know what type i shud be usin, even after readin all that lol I just bought a HP laptop and need to make some back up disk's Do i use dvd or cd and do i use + or - ?
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 01 May 08 03:23
I have a old Panasonic DMR-ES10 set top DVD recorder. It's supposed to be compatible with both +R(W) & -R(W)s. But for some reason I've gotten a lot of failures when trying to use +Rs. I guesstimate that I've lost about 15-20 +R discs from a 100 disc spindle. Bad! However I have never had my box turn a -R into a coaster. Go figure! I guess the bottom line is to try a bunch of both +Rs & -Rs and see which one your drive prefers.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 05 Jun 08 14:13
Comments still being posted for a 5 year old article? Hey, science is science. If it hasn't changed, then it's still valid. There are few sites that have attempted to show the format differences. As for the guy who said "the grammar in this article stunk to high heaven", what was that referring too? The grammer was just fine.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 07 Jun 08 20:47
I have used + for 2 years now and the only problems I've ever had was my own ram. The - I've used every now and again usually give me problems. I love Kiera Knightley
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 03 Sep 08 16:43
after 5 years i'm back,hope everyone is ok :g
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 05 Sep 08 11:50
Can say such words: each recorder has his own preferences. So before decide what to buy - first try to burn several +R 'n several -R. What will live longer, what will read better(mean can or not read your dvd-players, maybe you have other DVD-roms, DVD-RWs drives, and so on) - these are better for you. I'm from Kazakhstan :g Love myself. and wife. :B
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 05 Sep 08 11:51
Forgot! Michael Spath, thanks for very intresting info!
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 18 Sep 08 14:49
I,m just a simple man who bought a cheap DVD recorder to replace my Video. I bought a pack of DVD-RW which wouldn't work Tried it on DVD+RW and worked just fine. So in my opinion DVD+RW is the better one. As simple as that. Thanks for the article Bill from Wales
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 10 Oct 08 06:12
I still don't know which one to use!!! Let's face it. They both have their advantages and disadvantages. To me, they stack up to be pretty equal.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 05 Feb 09 22:01
I've had much better luck with DVD+Rs in general. Yes, I use cheap media.. the cheapest I can get. I have used at least 3 different combo drives that were capable of writing to both and I created more coffee cup coasters (failed writes) when I used DVD-R media. I would say twice as many as DVD+R. Good article - it is again well. :g
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 16 Feb 09 05:01
I've recorded my son's piano performance on Hi 8 Video camera and then copied it to DVD using Panasonic DVD/VCR newest machine. When I've used DVD-RW it has created separate files with different length (i.e. 132,532kb; 145,334kb) for each piece and we were able to upload them on youtube. When I've used DVD+RW, although disk was completely normal for playing either on DVD player or computer using DVD player program, the menu with 3 pieces has appeared, and every piece played normally, when I placed the disk in computer in order to upload it to youtube, I discovered that instead of 3 big files there were 9 files with 8 of them with the same length of 119,840kb and one with 120,064kb. When I clicked on each file it only played a portion of the music piece. Somehow the each music piece was subdivided: the first piece on files 1,2,3; the second music piece started on file 3 and continued on files 4,5,6; and finally the third piece started on file 6 and continued through files7,8,9. So I assumed that DVD+RW internally divided music piece among different files. Can someone please explain to me why my files got fragmented? Should I not use DVD+RW for this purpose or I just did not properly setup my recording parameters for DVD+RW? Truly, I can't recall that I was prompted for any options related to this.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 21 Mar 09 01:07
All I know is that I tried to burn a video to several DVD-Rs and in every DVD player I put them in they skipped and hung. Then I burned the same video to a DVD+R and it plays just fine. That's all I need to know to convince me that +R is better.
0 Agree

knight1024
New Member
Posted on: 23 Mar 09 17:09
Okay, I'm still confused! Every one seems to favor one format or the other. The conclusion of the main article by the staff writer is based on "rewritable DVD formats" (HIS words). I am concerned with write-once DVD formats and I can't follow all of the technical jargon. So, here's my questions: 1) Between DVD-R and DVD+R (both write-once), which format has the better-looking video and better-sounding audio? (Is there really a NOTICEABLE difference?) 2) Which format will allow the video/audio to last longer on the disks without degrading over the years? Those are my main questions. I'm not really concerned with compatibility and errors so much. Can anyone give me definite answers on these two questions? -Mike
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 12 Apr 09 15:04
It would be more helpful if someone does tests on compariable DVD+R and DVD-R brands and report the average failure rate/reading spead, etc.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 17 Apr 09 15:53
I just wanted to stoob here with no smiley
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 02 Jun 09 22:01
Citing a format as superior based upon anecdotal evidence from the user of a single recorder is foolhardy at best. All such experiences mean is that a given format works best with a given drive for a given purpose. From the article, one learns that +RW is technically superior to -RW, but how that pans out with a particular recorder is all that matters. The best format for a person is best determined from experience. If + works better in a particular recorder for playback in a given sample of players, then choose +. If - works better, then choose -.
0 Agree

robertazimmerman
CD Freaks Rookie
Posted on: 05 Jun 09 17:07
...and since no DVD+Rs or DVD+RWs will play on any of my 3 Toshiba players, the "+" format is useless in my humble opinion. R
0 Agree

Wischmop
MyCE Senior Member
Posted on: 05 Jun 09 18:37
Pscht, don´t say the truth, one or more ppl get a ban because they asked critical questions here (and don´t insult or do something)
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 07 Jun 09 05:14
Badly need your help. You can't wait for inspiration. You have to go after it with a club. I am from Zambia and bad know English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Address leading yemeni company specialized in import and marketing of pharmaceuticals and.Definition of antiallergic from the merriam webster online dictionary with audio pronunciations, thesaurus, word of the day, and word games." Waiting for a reply , Latimer.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 08 Jun 09 08:05
I read the article after getting a Google Search hit in which I was mainly looking for which format to buy since a spindle of 100 Memorex from Staples has either the DVD-R or DVD+R available for the same price of $23 for a limited time. Since I have a DVD-RW Burner and never used it for burning DVD's, I was curious which format to buy, -/+? This article did not answer my question totally, but it did fill in some gaps in which is better for the technical reasons. I do not expect that many of the posters here would even know what the terms meant, because they are written from a technical engineering standpoint that only an Electronics Technician would understand. Since I have taken an Electronics Technician Program, I fully understand that Michael Spath fully understands which format is better, because his explaination made perfect sense to me when I read it. However, my question of which one to buy based on future readability remains to be decided yet. I do know this for a fact. There is a lot of junk being put into your so called OEM PC's when they are manufactured. You think I am joking, I do not joke. All I know is my uncle has called me up to his place several times complaining that his drive does not burn discs anymore and they will not read them half of the time. He can have his D_LL, I will match my homebuilt PC against his piece of crap any day of the week, and I did not invest much more than he did when I built it, yet mine keeps churning day after day, week after week, year after year. I have always been successful burning CD/R's. But then I use Nero and I did not buy one of those DVD Burners that has forums flooded with problems, like they put in his computer. I bought a cheap one on sale, and it works. But, I will say the Plextor is a great Burner. There is quality in them. Only one person I know has ever complained about their Plextor External Drive. I told him to buy it because it was rated very high and no complaints could be found with searches on that model drive either. Not so with many of the models of the same make put into the D_LL Computers. Just check the forums and you will see, they are junk. Junk to me means repeated problems with anything that many other people are having also. I tried to get my uncle to let me replace the drive, but he says I don't want to burn CD's anyhow, my wife does. I don't want it changed. If D_LL won't work, then I will buy another computer, wow, such a closed-minded thinking process there. Personally, I just do not have the patience nor the time to sit there and listen to his question after question and his trying to hurry me up all the time, often resulting in mistakes. Never, Never work on a person's PC in their home, they are not trained to leave you alone and allow you to do the work, they are a constant aggravation and a waste of my time. Those are the people who need to do some serious reading for about 10 years so they know half of what I have learned by reading the past 10 years, implementing as well as doing successful repairs and never getting stumped once, because I know how to find my answers and if others are having the same type of troubles. Believe me, the man that wrote this article knows what he is talking about. Bottom Line, his assessment of a better format, the DVD+R(W) format is right on track. Anyone with less than an Electronics Technician Education in Electronics and Electricity as well as Digital and Microprocessor Technology will be intimidated, but he does know and his assessment is correct. As for the format you should use, well that depends on 2 things, your drive you use now and will be using in the future, as well as whether you have bought the cheapest discs out there, or whether you have invested heavily into Achievable Disks. You want something to last a long time, you will need to invest in the best Archievable Disks money can buy. Al Fasoldt is a Syracuse Newspaper Network Systems Administrator. He know his stuff. He has hosted Radio and TV Computer Shows, Teaches at a local college, and trains his staff in the IT Department. He has written articles for the Syracuse Sunday Stars section of the Syracuse Sunday Newspaper on Achievable Discs. If your on a shoestring budget, do not invest in them, but if you value your data, pictures, movies, or anything else you want to preserve on a disc, consider buying reliability, and it does not come cheap. About a dollar per disc as I was told. No Name Brands will not preserve your data forever, or for very long for that matter, and spindles that give me lots of frizibies I just do not bother buying again. That simple. Buy what you need for the purpose you need it for. Have you priced a good Plextor Drive? I have and I can say, if I could afford it, I would have one. When my friends quit after about 3 years, he was asking me about another make. Yeh, yeh, yea. Another make. Yet he did it appreciate the fact he used that drive to death to back up his Aerial Photos onto for the future, yet he would not invest in Achievable discs. You run an aerial photography business, it would behoove you to buy the best. This comment should help those not so fortunate to have an education under their belt in Electronics, because I wrote it for any layman to understand. Hope this helps you do some research before investing your money into cheap stuff in the future. Buy 3 or 4 cheapies, and you have bought a good model. May have well saved the aggravation in the first place, wouldn't you think?
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 08 Jun 09 08:15
One more little detail. The information he is talking about concerning the Bits and Bytes and Strings of DATA comes easy after you take a Standards and Protocol Course at ITT Tech, where they teach this kind of necessary knowledge for Information Technology Computer Networking Systems Degree Program. And as far as ECC (Error Correcting), some protocols (languages and methods of sending data down a network cable form Server to Server, IP Address to IP Address and from Computer to Computer in a Computer Network) have Error Correcting Capability and some does not. That is why some protocols are chosen over others in the first place. Depends on what you want to do with the DATA, the 1's and the 0's. In Ditital Electronics which is how the computer works, it is either on or off, a zero means off and a 1 means on. It is these 0's and 1's that allow you to send any data or record any data. Everything works on this simple yet very complicated system. These 0's and 1's mean something, and depending on the sequence sent in packets, will depend on what is used for a header and what is used as a trailer being placed before and after the actual string of 1's and 0's in the first place. Many things can be attached to the strings of data and that is how the hardware knows what to do with the data in the first place. That simple, isn't it? LOL.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 10 Jul 09 16:39
Argghhhh! :c I just want to know what is the real difference between DVD+R or DVD-R if I want to back-up info from my computer to a DVD and be able to add/delete info from it or record a movie and perhaps another on on the same DVD - I don't need a thesis - just a simple answer as to which is best for the purposes.
0 Agree

guest
No longer with us
Posted on: 14 Jul 09 16:13
You want a direct answer Izzy? DVD+R(W)
0 Agree

JLYate
New Member
Posted on: 05 Mar 11 16:57
This article was first posted on 23rd June 2003, and there were still postings coming in dated July 2009. DVD-R and DVD+R disks are both still being sold at roughly equal cheap prices in my local supermarket.
So despite the clear arguments in the above article, this Civil War has been going on longer that the English and American ones, if my polical history is correct, and shows no real sign of abating.
But I'll certainly try using some DVD+R and DVD+RW - initially in small packs !
0 Agree

coolcolors
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 05 Mar 11 20:12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLYate
This article was first posted on 23rd June 2003, and there were still postings coming in dated July 2009. DVD-R and DVD+R disks are both still being sold at roughly equal cheap prices in my local supermarket.
So despite the clear arguments in the above article, this Civil War has been going on longer that the English and American ones, if my polical history is correct, and shows no real sign of abating.
But I'll certainly try using some DVD+R and DVD+RW - initially in small packs !
The main reason is to format +R media to DVD-ROM as standard commerical movies and press media come in that present format not -R format. Either way I wouldn't use RW media for movie backup but only for data backup in that way wouldn't matter + or - media is used.
0 Agree

_chef_
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 12 Mar 11 11:57
Exceptions may apply by rule.
0 Agree

genealogy
New Member
Posted on: 10 Sep 12 16:57
After seeing all the possible compatability problems with various hardware, etc.
It makes me extremely causious in using my dual layer DVD for archiving.
Does anyone have any experience with this recent technology? In other words, should I stick with current DVD+R and DVD-R platforms for the time being until more experiences are known with the dual layer models? Thanks Bill
0 Agree

_chef_
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 11 Sep 12 07:03
Archiving is not using.....

Archiving is just for backing data up.
0 Agree

ChristineBCW
MyCE Die Hard
Posted on: 11 Sep 12 10:25
Bill, I don't have recent experience with DLs.

The choice for me started when I discovered incompatibility (from one computer sitting next to the DL-burner computer) early in the "DL Life Cycle". Then I decided it was "bad burns" or "bad media" OR indeed some incompatibility issue.

Either way, I think the expense of the DLs was a minor issue.

The far greater issue for me was the great length of time it took to do a "restore" to a different computer, and that's the acid test - will all files be restorable or not?

Not a sampling, not the first and last - but all of them.

Since I wasn't willing to spend that much time, I decided to stick with single-layer Data-DVDs. And an external drive. And a networked drive or two, too.

I'd love to think DL Drives & Disks have all the compatibility issues solved, but the only way to be certain is to buy a handful, fill them up, and then do full restores to another computer. Until I'm willing to actually do that, then I'm admitting I'm really not willing to find out. (How depressing - DVDs, on their way out as a media, still might have compatibility issues?!! Yikes... it really IS depressing.)
0 Agree

xtacydima
Former Moderator
Posted on: 19 Sep 12 02:51
@genealogy

This is an old resurrected thread and i believe most current day hardware has less problems dealing with DL discs... but of course there is always room for error and you can't go 100% of the time in any player or hardware you ever expect to encounter to use that disc in (in the future) to always work all the time, although this will hold true for non DL discs as well.

So long as you burn them (using +R booktype) as a -ROM booktype you will increase your chance for compatibility
0 Agree

AllanDeGroot
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 19 Sep 12 07:28
As I've understood it some early +RW drives didn't "play nice" with -R discs.

Somewhere I have one of the famous Teac DV-W58E
(Yeah I cheated, I reached under my desk to read the model number off it)
Drives that wouldn't READ -R Discs but it was splendid with +R's that once ad it's own dedicated internet bitch site (Dell sold thousands of these as OEM and didn't warn anyone (in big enough print) that +R disc MUST be used...


but to get on point here it is my understanding that -R discs use data space to record positional information on the disc, in a +R disc that information is in the tracking groove.

So all things considered +r Discs tend to remain readable when scratched to a greater degree than -R discs.

I couldn't tell you about DL discs, I've never handled one outside
a SEALED package,but frankly I've never seen a -R/DL disc
(not that I've taken the effort to look... nor will I now...)

RELIABLE DL discs are a narrow swathe, and for the increased price of DL discs I simply decline to play their game... I often buy +R 100disc spindle packs at
staples for $22, for that I can't even buy a ten pack of the DL discs...

So I don't bother
0 Agree

tmc8080
MyCE Resident
Posted on: 24 Sep 12 23:47
Wow, there's been a rash of old threads being dug up on MYCE lately..!
The +r discussion brings back memories (of 3+ years ago) lol
People probably just warehouse this data on hard drives, with optical disc as backups.. and you need to re-verify that the data is still good from time to time and stagger re-backups every couple of years..

IMHO, deent analog tape media will last longer than any hard drive or optical disk given the SAME basic conditions over time (based on a 5 - 20 year lifespan range).

Just so your upto speed... analog tape (good quality) 20 years, hard drive 5 years (although the crap made today is not earning my enthusaism and I might lower this to 3), and last but not least.. optical 2 - 5 years and a big YMMV even on good media. If you want to stagger backups, I'd say 2 backups every 2 years with 6 - 10 discs in rotation so the discs that lose data integrity get tossed and replaced with another set of two discs... but 10 discs maximum in a set (assuming the data fits on ONE disc).

I probably still have programs from the digital tape drive era hanging around on disc.. probably less than half that stuff will work on windows 7... (anybody still playing f-15 strike eagle 3???) haha
0 Agree

Post your comment

Myce.com settings

Several settings at Myce.com can be changed, they are stored in cookies, which means they will be reset if you clear Myce.com cookies

Background

Change the background to a plain color or trianglified image (similar to the default image)

No tracking features

At Myce most social media feature are done server side and impose no privacy risk to the visitor when not used. Several features use Javascript with you can turn off here

Layout

Switch to the List layout for an index with chronologycally listed news items or Grid layout for a block based layout. To see the change you need to reload the page

×