From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A78138010 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:05:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E53CC21C006; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:04:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0E6C21C018 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:57:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f181.google.com ([209.85.220.181]:52379) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1T3STp-0014cX-Me for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:57:21 +0700 Received: by vcbfl17 with SMTP id fl17so5423687vcb.40 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 06:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.221.18 with SMTP id ia18mr10188253vcb.62.1345471038855; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 06:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.29.13 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 06:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.29.13 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Aug 2012 06:57:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20120820102139.GB2928@ca.inter.net> <201208201219.50251.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <50322FF3.6050309@alyf.net> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:57:18 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : DVD drive From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9cfc7005398c504c7b2e37e X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: e72a13e3-34c8-457c-a875-89b112352ffd X-Archives-Hash: 10042621d94e38cd8cdd37aa408d696e --14dae9cfc7005398c504c7b2e37e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Aug 20, 2012 8:51 PM, "Pandu Poluan" wrote: > > > On Aug 20, 2012 7:47 PM, "Andrea Conti" wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > Yes, +RW, -RW, but don't know much more on this other than older DVD writers > > > would only do one format not another and if you didn't pay attention to the > > > specification/limitations of your hardware you could end up buying the wrong > > > type of DVDs. Someone more experienced on recording media could answer this > > > better. > > > > Every modern recorder does both standards; depending on both the burner > > and the reader you might find that one standard works better than the > > other (i.e. has lower read error rates). Trial and error seems to be the > > only working approach... > > > > As for the standards, if you're just burning backups they're basically > > equivalent. The +RW standard is theoretically more flexible as media can > > be formatted in a "packet" mode which allows (almost) random r/w access, > > but in my experience software support and reliability have always been > > lousy, so forget about it. > > > > +RW media cannot be erased in the same way CD-RWs are erased, -- you can > > only overwrite it with new data. -RW behaves the same as CD-RWs in this > > regard. > > > > If you need rewritable DVD media with reliable random r/w access (but > > this doesn't seem to be your case), there is a third standard (DVD-RAM) > > which uses special disks with hardware sector marks. Drive support is > > not hard to find nowadays (the drive you cited actually supports it), > > but writing is slow, good media is expensive and the disks cannot be > > read in most "normal" dvd drives; I have no idea about the state of > > software support in Linux. > > > > +RW *can* be erased, or else it won't be called RW :-) > > That said, the difference is much deeper than differing metadata. Among which : > > * +RW uses Phase Modulation, -RW uses amplitude modulation. This gives +RW much more robustness than -RW > > * +RW blanks provide more info on the energy level required to burn, IIRC up to 4 energy levels each tuned to a certain burning speed (e.g., 1x, 2x, 4x, and 8x). This *greatly* improves the success probability of burning. -RW only provides energy level info for the maximum burning speed; if your drive doesn't support that speed, it'll have to guess, and the results are usually ungood > > More history : > > The CD Standard was originally developed by Philips, then adapted to the data world requirements, including CD-R(W). The DVD-R standard was originally developed by Panasonic, but Philips had a spat with Panasonic because in Phillips' view, the CD-R standard has shortcomings they (Philips) want to fix; Panasonic was more interested in getting DVD-R out of the door asap. This resulted in Philips -- together with someone else, was it Sony? -- to independently released the DVD+R standard. > > CMIIW > Aha, found the page comparing +R(W) and -R(W) : http://www.myce.com/article/why-dvdrw-is-superior-to-dvd-rw-203/ tldr: DVD+R(W) is technically a better standard. Use it. Rgds, --14dae9cfc7005398c504c7b2e37e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Aug 20, 2012 8:51 PM, "Pandu Poluan" <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 20, 2012 7:47 PM, "Andrea Conti" <alyf@alyf.net> wrote:
> >
>
> [snip]
>
> > >
> > > Yes, +RW, -RW, but don't know much more on this other th= an older DVD writers
> > > would only do one format not another and if you didn't p= ay attention to the
> > > specification/limitations of your hardware you could end up = buying the wrong
> > > type of DVDs. =C2=A0Someone more experienced on recording me= dia could answer this
> > > better.
> >
> > Every modern recorder does both standards; depending on both the = burner
> > and the reader you might find that one standard works better than= the
> > other (i.e. has lower read error rates). Trial and error seems to= be the
> > only working approach...
> >
> > As for the standards, if you're just burning backups they'= ;re basically
> > equivalent. The +RW standard is theoretically more flexible as me= dia can
> > be formatted in a "packet" mode which allows (almost) r= andom r/w access,
> > but in my experience software support and reliability have always= been
> > lousy, so forget about it.
> >
> > +RW media cannot be erased in the same way CD-RWs are erased, -- = you can
> > only overwrite it with new data. -RW behaves the same as CD-RWs i= n this
> > regard.
> >
> > If you need rewritable DVD media with reliable random r/w access = (but
> > this doesn't seem to be your case), there is a third standard= (DVD-RAM)
> > which uses special disks with hardware sector marks. Drive suppor= t is
> > not hard to find nowadays (the drive you cited actually supports = it),
> > but writing is slow, good media is expensive and the disks cannot= be
> > read in most "normal" dvd drives; I have no idea about = the state of
> > software support in Linux.
> >
>
> +RW *can* be erased, or else it won't be called RW :-)
>
> That said, the difference is much deeper than differing metadata. Amon= g which :
>
> * +RW uses Phase Modulation, -RW uses amplitude modulation. This gives= +RW much more robustness than -RW
>
> * +RW blanks provide more info on the energy level required to burn, I= IRC up to 4 energy levels each tuned to a certain burning speed (e.g., 1x, = 2x, 4x, and 8x). This *greatly* improves the success probability of burning= . -RW only provides energy level info for the maximum burning speed; if you= r drive doesn't support that speed, it'll have to guess, and the re= sults are usually ungood
>
> More history :
>
> The CD Standard was originally developed by Philips, then adapted to t= he data world requirements, including CD-R(W).=C2=A0 The DVD-R standard was= originally developed by Panasonic, but Philips had a spat with Panasonic= =C2=A0 because in Phillips' view, the CD-R standard has shortcomings th= ey (Philips) want to fix; Panasonic was more interested in getting DVD-R ou= t of the door asap. This resulted in Philips -- together with someone else,= was it Sony? -- to independently released the DVD+R standard.
>
> CMIIW
>

Aha, found the page comparing +R(W) and -R(W) :

http://www.myce.com/article/why-dvdrw-is-superior-to-dvd-rw-203/<= /p>

tldr: DVD+R(W) is technically a better standard. Use it.

Rgds,

--14dae9cfc7005398c504c7b2e37e--