DVD+R vs DVD - R

I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20
dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for
archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV
shows. This is not what I've been told about the difference in the
past. The packs seem to be almost identical, no mention of quality on
either pack.

Thanks
Mike

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:40:38 GMT, MikeM wrote
in :

I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20
dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for
archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV
shows.

Total baloney. The price of DVD+R and DVD-R is normally the same.
I personally prefer DVD+R because of better error management, but that
has nothing to do with price.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

John Navas added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are
$20 dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are
intended for archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording
things like TV shows.

Total baloney. The price of DVD+R and DVD-R is normally the
same. I personally prefer DVD+R because of better error
management, but that has nothing to do with price.

John, I've not heard of anything that improves error handling so
I am quite interested in your expanding on your comment even
though I am not the OP. I use Roxio Easy Media Creator 8 and it
seems not to matter at all whether I use -R or +R. The failure
rate on my PC is so low that it makes no difference to me and I
buy whichever is on sale for my PC. See my reply to the OP,
though, for the entirely different results I get on a TV DVR.

Any info you could pass on wrt error handling would be most
appreciated.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"Never complain, never explain" - Henry Ford II

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:02:33 GMT, "HEMI-Powered" wrote in
:

John Navas added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

Total baloney. The price of DVD+R and DVD-R is normally the
same. I personally prefer DVD+R because of better error
management, but that has nothing to do with price.

John, I've not heard of anything that improves error handling so
I am quite interested in your expanding on your comment even
though I am not the OP. I use Roxio Easy Media Creator 8 and it
seems not to matter at all whether I use -R or +R. The failure
rate on my PC is so low that it makes no difference to me and I
buy whichever is on sale for my PC. See my reply to the OP,
though, for the entirely different results I get on a TV DVR.

Any info you could pass on wrt error handling would be most
appreciated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

In addition, DVD+R(W) has a more robust error management system than
DVD-R(W), allowing for more accurate burning to media independent of
the quality of the media. Additional session linking methods are more
accurate with DVD+R(W) versus DVD-R(W), resulting in fewer damaged or
unusable discs due to buffer under-run and multi-session disks with
fewer PI/PO errors.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

John Navas added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

John, I've not heard of anything that improves error handling
so I am quite interested in your expanding on your comment
even though I am not the OP. I use Roxio Easy Media Creator 8
and it seems not to matter at all whether I use -R or +R. The
failure rate on my PC is so low that it makes no difference to
me and I buy whichever is on sale for my PC. See my reply to
the OP, though, for the entirely different results I get on a
TV DVR.

Any info you could pass on wrt error handling would be most
appreciated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

In addition, DVD+R(W) has a more robust error management
system than DVD-R(W), allowing for more accurate burning to
media independent of the quality of the media. Additional
session linking methods are more accurate with DVD+R(W)
versus DVD-R(W), resulting in fewer damaged or unusable
discs due to buffer under-run and multi-session disks with
fewer PI/PO errors.

John, thanks for the link. I read the entire article but still do
not understand the apparent point. I've not seen Roxio 8 throw any
errors thus I have no direct experience but if the +R format
supports better error reporting, maybe I haven't seen it because
all of my burns have been error free with both -R and +R, at least
as far as Roxio "sees."

I haven't had a buffer under-run error since the early days of CD-R
and I don't do multi-session discs, do not "format" them to emulate
a read/write HD file system, nor do I use RW anything because my
few attempts were very unrealiable. So, thanks muchly for the added
info and link; I am still confused.

Do you have an opinion wrt my DVR throwing errors with DVD+R as
well as requiring a format by the DVR even though neither has ever
occurred with my PC? After reading the wikepedia article, I think I
can see why the DVR wants to format the disc, perhaps back to -R
that it may like better for some reason. The manual is pretty ****
poor, even though it appears to be quite comprehensive and claims
to support both single and dual-layer -R and +R discs but not in my
experience.

I am hardly disputing you or wikepedia or anyone, I am just
confused. Would not a modern DVR understand advanced error control
or is the burning software very unsophisticated compared to what
Roxio, Nero and other major optical utilities can do?

Of course, I've long known that on PCs occasionally and certainly
on the 2 different models with similar specs of the Panasonic DVR I
talked about are sensitive to media type because of the color of
the dye layer "confusing" the burning laser.

John, would I be correct in assuming that you have experienced
errors with -R discs that burn OK with +R? I will add one more
comment about my method of insuring or at least trying to insure a
truly error-free burn: no matter what the file type whether it be
JPEG, RAW, MS Office, downloaded app updates, MP3 files, just about
any common graphics or non-graphics file formats, I ALWAYS do a
number of sample reads/opens on the just burned disc even though no
errors have been reported. Now THAT has shown an occasional
problem. e.g., an entire folder full of MS 97 Word .doc files
burned correctly but none could be opened.

Perhaps I should add one more piece of info to this puzzle of mine:
for many reasons, I use ultra-long file names for my downloaded car
pictures, the ones I take with one of the 3 digital cameras I have
owned over the years, scans, family pictures, etc. I do this so as
to easily pack in as much data about the picture files so that it
is easily searchable by Windows Search rather than use a utility
such as Exifer and I use a really neat free utility called Long
File Name Finder to scan my folders for the total length of the
file names. Thus with my desire for max meta data embedded in the
file name, I long ago ran into the 64-character name limit imposed
by the Joliet file system and now use it very seldom, e.g., to
create MP3 CDs for my car. I almost exclusively use UDF. I have
never found a need for an ISO disc yet so have never tried that.

Do you have any comments about Joliet vs. UDF? UDF theoretically
allows up to 125 character names, including the extension. I use
120. Occasionally, very occasionally, the entire CD or DVD will
burn without error but all the files and folder names were zero
length. I haven't had this happen in some time, but it occurred
somewhat more frequently when I was using Roxio 5 for just CD-R.

Thanks again for your insights.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"Never complain, never explain" - Henry Ford II

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 09:54:01 GMT, "HEMI-Powered" wrote in
:

John Navas added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

In addition, DVD+R(W) has a more robust error management
system than DVD-R(W), allowing for more accurate burning to
media independent of the quality of the media. Additional
session linking methods are more accurate with DVD+R(W)
versus DVD-R(W), resulting in fewer damaged or unusable
discs due to buffer under-run and multi-session disks with
fewer PI/PO errors.

John, thanks for the link. I read the entire article but still do
not understand the apparent point.

The point is that DVD+R technology has more robust error management than
DVD-R technology.

http://www.ceqna.com/tivo-dvrs/989-tivo-3.html

Improved tracking / speed control / error-management technologies
reduce the number of rejects during manufacture and errors during
playback. Because of this, DVD+R disks are less sensitive to media
quality than DVD-R disks.

http://www.cdfreaks.com/reviews/Why-DVDRW-is-superior-to-DVD-RW

Why DVD+R(W) is superior to DVD-R(W)
[read entire article]

http://www.homefurnish.com/hometheaterelectronics/computers/dvdrvsdvdr.aspx

The ADIP system of tracking and speed control in a DVD+R recorder is
more accurate than the LPP system used by DVD-R, making it less
susceptible to interference and error at high speeds.

Also, DVD+R has a more accurate and stronger error management system
than DVD-R(W), allowing for more consistent quality. Additional
session linking methods are quite a bit more accurate with DVD+R
versus DVD-R, resulting in fewer ruined disks.

I've not seen Roxio 8 throw any
errors thus I have no direct experience but if the +R format
supports better error reporting, maybe I haven't seen it because
all of my burns have been error free with both -R and +R, at least
as far as Roxio "sees."

You're only looking at immediate hard errors. Sort errors are also
important because they can become hard errors over time and/or on
different equipment.

Do you have an opinion wrt my DVR throwing errors with DVD+R as
well as requiring a format by the DVR even though neither has ever
occurred with my PC?

DVD+R do not require formatting. Are you thinking of DVD+RW? Different
technology. Please be precise in your posts.

Of course, I've long known that on PCs occasionally and certainly
on the 2 different models with similar specs of the Panasonic DVR I
talked about are sensitive to media type because of the color of
the dye layer "confusing" the burning laser.

That's a myth. What matters are reflectivity and media quality.

John, would I be correct in assuming that you have experienced
errors with -R discs that burn OK with +R?

I experience higher quality burned discs with +R than with -R.

I will add one more
comment about my method of insuring or at least trying to insure a
truly error-free burn: no matter what the file type whether it be
JPEG, RAW, MS Office, downloaded app updates, MP3 files, just about
any common graphics or non-graphics file formats, I ALWAYS do a
number of sample reads/opens on the just burned disc even though no
errors have been reported. Now THAT has shown an occasional
problem. e.g., an entire folder full of MS 97 Word .doc files
burned correctly but none could be opened.

Then your burning software is fatally flawed and should be replaced.

Do you have any comments about Joliet vs. UDF? ...

I use UDF.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, John Navas wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 07:02:33 GMT, "HEMI-Powered" wrote:

Any info you could pass on wrt error handling would be most
appreciated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD%2BR

In addition, DVD+R(W) has a more robust error management system than
DVD-R(W), allowing for more accurate burning to media independent of
the quality of the media. Additional session linking methods are more
accurate with DVD+R(W) versus DVD-R(W), resulting in fewer damaged or
unusable discs due to buffer under-run and multi-session disks with
fewer PI/PO errors.

Maybe this is why +R discs store about 7 MB less.

Don www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom).

MikeM wrote:
I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20
dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for
archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV
shows.

If you had brains would you be a salesdweeb at some electronics store?
The short version is that he's pushing one version for the profits.

This is not what I've been told about the difference in the
past. The packs seem to be almost identical, no mention of quality on
either pack.

Pretty much.

--
Ray Fischer

On 11 Feb 2008 06:05:00 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in
:

MikeM wrote:
I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20
dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for
archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV
shows.

If you had brains would you be a salesdweeb at some electronics store?

If you had brains would you be believing a salesdweeb at some
electronics store?

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

John Navas wrote:

On 11 Feb 2008 06:05:00 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote in :



MikeM wrote:



I was told by a salesman that the 50 packs of TDK DVD+Rs are $20 dearer than 50 packs of DVD-Rs because the DVD+Rs are intended for archival use whereas the DVD-Rs are for recording things like TV shows.



If you had brains would you be a salesdweeb at some electronics store?

If brains were dynamite, he would not have enough to blow his nose.


If you had brains would you be believing a salesdweeb at some electronics store?