[b3t4]

I read in a thread some days ago that people managed to burn dvd rw on their 17" . I wanted to buy one this morning and find out that there is DVD-RW and DVD+RW

Which one is working???

Any news about dvd-ram????


thanks

beta

[DVD Plaza]

DVD-RW is what you'll need for burning, but note that given it's a hit and miss function the brand you purhcase may impact your ability to burn to them.

[b3t4]

verbatim or fujitsu siemens a good choice???


beta

[rjenkinson]

it would be nice if apple changed the superdrive in their machines. i picked up a sony DRU-500AX the other day. it burns DVD-R, DVD+R, DVD-RW, DVD+RW, in addition to all CD formats. (the "no mac support" claim in the review is misleading. the drive does not ship with any mac software, but i slapped it into an old lacie firewire CD burner case and been burning discs without any problems.)

-r.

[Eug]

Originally posted by rjenkinson:
it would be nice if apple changed the superdrive in their machines. i picked up a sony DRU-500AX the other day. it burns DVD-R, DVD+R, DVD-RW, DVD+RW, in addition to all CD formats. (the "no mac support" claim in the review is misleading. the drive does not ship with any mac software, but i slapped it into an old lacie firewire CD burner case and been burning discs without any problems.)

-r.

For what purpose? It would cost them more and would provide marginal benefit. DVD+RW duplicates DVD-RW, and DVD+R duplicates DVD-R. It's not as if you're gaining much functionality.

A more useful combo would be RW/R with RAM. These drives exist and are inexpensive but unfortunately, none do 4X DVD-R yet.

[parsec_kadets]

Originally posted by b3t4:
verbatim or fujitsu siemens a good choice???


beta

Verbatim DVD-RW worked in my 17" PB.

[Jayman20]

I've had good results with Memorex and TDK DVD-RW's so far. Had a few troubles with an imation, but it may have been a flukey disc.

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by Eug:
For what purpose? It would cost them more and would provide marginal benefit. DVD+RW duplicates DVD-RW, and DVD+R duplicates DVD-R. It's not as if you're gaining much functionality.

A more useful combo would be RW/R with RAM. These drives exist and are inexpensive but unfortunately, none do 4X DVD-R yet.

well, for one thing, you wouldn't have to worry about the two competing formats since you could burn both. and the sony drive can burn DVD-Rs at 4x speed.

-r.

[TheBum]

Originally posted by rjenkinson:
well, for one thing, you wouldn't have to worry about the two competing formats since you could burn both. and the sony drive can burn DVD-Rs at 4x speed.

Also, I believe DVD+R(W) supports multisession burning and DVD-R(W) does not.

[Eug]

Originally posted by rjenkinson:
well, for one thing, you wouldn't have to worry about the two competing formats since you could burn both. and the sony drive can burn DVD-Rs at 4x speed.

-r.

My point was that the two competing formats do the same thing, so the benefit is minor, for significant extra cost. (DVD-R/W drives without RAM do 4X DVD-R as well.)

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Eug:
the two competing formats do the same thing, so the benefit is minor

All cars drive on the road but that hardly makes them all equal.

DVD- and DVD+ are quite different, in fact I consider DVD- to be a crock of - gimme DVD+ anyday.

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by Eug:
My point was that the two competing formats do the same thing, so the benefit is minor, for significant extra cost. (DVD-R/W drives without RAM do 4X DVD-R as well.)

the price of my drive was the same as the pioneer A05 drive so i'd say the "significant extra cost" is roughly $0, give or take.

-r.

[Eug]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
DVD- and DVD+ are quite different, in fact I consider DVD- to be a crock of - gimme DVD+ anyday.

Based on what? It seems to me to be more of a 6 of one and a half dozen of the other situation.

Originally posted by rjenkinson:
the price of my drive was the same as the pioneer A05 drive so i'd say the "significant extra cost" is roughly $0, give or take.

OK, here in Toronto the OEM Pioneer A05 is about CAD$385 (US$267) and the OEM Sony DWU-10A is about CAD$510 ($354). ie. Sony costs 1/3rd more than the Pioneer. YMMV.

Checking PriceWatch the US mail order prices are US$210 and US$320 respectively, a 50% price difference.

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Eug:
Based on what?

Real world facts perhaps!

Want to record a TV show directly onto DVD-RW? Sorry, disc needs to be formatted first - it'll be done by the time your show is finished.

Manage to record a TV show onto a DVD-RW disc? Sorry, you can't go using that disc anywhere else until you "finalise" it. Great stuff!

The recording you did make is fixed in bit rate throughout, so forget optimal use of space let alone quality...

Oh that TV show you just recorded, no editing it on a computer - if you recorded it on a settop it can't be modified on a computer. Created it on a computer? No fiddling with it on a settop.

The list goes on, but the most surprising thing is if you want that DVD-RW disc to be played on another player you need to record in "compatibility" mode - which renders any fancy features that recorder may have unusable (must record in a proprietory format to use them).

DVD+RW on the other hand, no such limitations - just record and go. All features (including hiding parts of recordings (commercials, etc), deleting, changing chapter stops, menu editing, splitting recordings, etc) are available, bit rates vary like a real DVD, edit that recording you made on your TV on a computer if you wish (or vice versa), etc.

Note this is "real world" recording on an actual DVD recorder - ie using a DVD recorder in your lounge room instead of a VHS player. For manufacturing DVD movies on a computer the problems with DVD-RW are not quite as bad - then again if you're storing files on the discs then DVD-RAM and DVD+RW are still your best bet due to their built-in error correcting features (no way I'd trust important data on DVD-RW, one scratch and there's no chance your data is readable).

DVD-RW is usable in a computer scenario, even if still not the most ideal choice, but for "real world" settop as a VHS replacement it's a joke.

So no, I hardly consider DVD-RW and DVD+RW to be only "minor" in difference - heck even the phase changing method to burn onto the discs themselves are different between them.

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by Eug:
OK, here in Toronto the OEM Pioneer A05 is about CAD$385 (US$267) and the OEM Sony DWU-10A is about CAD$510 ($354). ie. Sony costs 1/3rd more than the Pioneer. YMMV.

Checking PriceWatch the US mail order prices are US$210 and US$320 respectively, a 50% price difference.

although i did see the pioneer drive listed for �29000 (CAN$349) here in japan, it is possible to get it for only �22000 (CAN$265). i paid �29000 for the sony DRU-500AX drive (not the DWU-10A) which is still pretty cheap. the percentage between the two sets of prices seems to be about the same, but the base prices are much lower when you live near the factories, i suppose...

-r.

[Eug]

DVD Plaza, you may want to look at this (admittedly biased) post here.

For error correction, the gold standard is DVD-RAM, not DVD-RW or DVD+RW. Indeed, with computer drives, the data is verified with each write with DVD-RAM, as it's being written. This is not true with either DVD+RW or DVD-RW.

For editing features on set top recorders, the gold standard is DVD-RAM in VR mode or DVD-RW in VR mode. DVD+RW is a distant third, and DVD-RW in normal mode is fourth. Furthermore, it was only recently that the Philips recorders had as good MPEG-2 encoding quality as the Panasonic and Pioneer units. The problem with VR mode is most DVD players can't play it, but fortunately, my desktop can and so can my separate DVD player. I'm gonna buy a US$99 DVD player for my mom that also supports this feature.

For DVD+RW if you delete something on a set top recorder, you can only write something there that is the same size or smaller. With DVD-RAM and DVD-RW in VR mode, you can record anywhere and as much as you want.

Anyways, first we were talking about computer drives, not set top drives. In the context of set top drives, the functionality of -RW and +RW are very similar. So my point stands. It's six of one and a half dozen of the other.

Even if you have a DVD+R standalone recorder for your home theater system, it does NOT necessitate having a +R recorder in your computer. The recorded +R disc will usually be readable in your DVD-ROM drive (as should -R discs from standalone DVD-R recorders).

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Eug:
you may want to look at this (admittedly biased) post

His comments aren't entirely correct and are extremely biased - perhaps he should use all three formats and then write that post.

Originally posted by Eug:
For error correction, the gold standard is DVD-RAM, not DVD-RW or DVD+RW.

I already said that, DVD-RAM and DVD+RW are the two formats with error correction (error checking, however, goes purely to DVD-RAM). DVD-RAM also has other benefits for data use, such as pure random access nature and the use of caddys.

Originally posted by Eug:
For editing features on set top recorders, the gold standard is DVD-RAM in VR mode or DVD-RW in VR mode.

You've got to be joking? A video recorded onto DVD-RAM might as well be on toilet paper, 99.99999% of DVD players don't know what the hell those discs are! DVD-RW in compatibility mode is as useless, might as well be burned in morse code (except for a handful of players you can go spend $$$$ to specifically add support for).

Originally posted by Eug:
For DVD+RW if you delete something on a set top recorder, you can only write something there that is the same size or smaller.

The point is that you can do this, and anything else you want, with a format that works on anything. No compatibility DVD-RW sh#t and no DVD-RAM that isn't even known by 99.999% of DVD players - just a format that simply works. DVD+RW is like a Mac - it just works.

Originally posted by Eug:
Anyways, first we were talking about computer drives, not set top drives.

I'm talking about both because it is important for mainstream - you can't go shoving formats into consumers faces with attitudes of "this shiny disc comes in many formats, use this one for that and that one for this and then another for this and another for that" you need to find one that satisfies most uses. DVD+RW does that.

Originally posted by Eug:
In the context of set top drives, the functionality of -RW and +RW are very similar.

Only valid if reworded as "functionality of -RW and +RW is very similar if you put -RW into useless mode".

Originally posted by Eug:
Even if you have a DVD+R standalone recorder for your home theater system, it does NOT necessitate having a +R recorder in your computer.

Yeah no worries, we'll just start running commercials and training courses to educate the public on using two idential yet entirely different DVD discs for different and non-overlapping purposes. That works. Who is going to fund it though, and who is going to fund the duplicate media? I have 30 DVD+RW discs, you offering to pay for buying new DVD-RW discs just because there's "no need to bother using your existing discs, just go buy entirely different ones"? Do you sincerely believe CD burning would have been so successful if consumers were told they had to buy entirely different media for CD players and computers? Then what about the fact that most people CREATE those CDs USING a computer in the first place... what if you use all your "Mac mentality demands using entirely different discs for data" discs up an urgently need to burn something, but all you have left are you "Mac mentality demands using entirely different discs for movies"... sorry, those discs are all useless, goodbye...

I thought it was bad enough for the industry that consuemers had to face the reality of competing formats, now we're adding a "let's use incompatible formats for different purposes" logic to it as well? Unbelievable?!?!

[Eug]

Well, then the best idea would be to stick to one format. And for Macs, that would be -. For PCs, you have more of a choice of + or -.

You've got to be joking? A video recorded onto DVD-RAM might as well be on toilet paper, 99.99999% of DVD players don't know what the hell those discs are! DVD-RW in compatibility mode is as useless, might as well be burned in morse code (except for a handful of players you can go spend $$$$ to specifically add support for).

The flexibility of - (and advantages over +) may surprise you. For instance, I can record on and watch the same media AT THE SAME TIME. For instance, start a one hour recording at 6 pm. Go start my dinner on my barbecue. Come back and start watching my show at 6:20, and skip thru commercials, and all the while the recorder is still burning the disc.

I thought it was bad enough for the industry that consuemers had to face the reality of competing formats, now we're adding a "let's use incompatible formats for different purposes" logic to it as well? Unbelievable?!?!

And that is the whole point of my original argument. These are NOT incompatible formats. If you burn a +R disc, it will likely play in a DVD player. If you burn a -R disc, it will likely play in a DVD player. This is NOT a beta vs. VHS argument at all.

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Eug:
The flexibility of - (and advantages over +) may surprise you.

They wouldn't suprise me as I'm aware of them - I carefully evaluated and tested each format in preparation for an article I wrote last year. If I wanted THE very best format feature wise then DVD-RAM wins hands down, BUT both DVD-RAM and DVD-RW implement their features in a proprietry fashion. DVD+RW on the other hand only implements features it can do in a fashion that works on any DVD player. That in my opinion is important - my house alone has eight DVD players (don't ask!!!) and not one of them would be able to use a DVD-RW with its incompatible stuff nor even know what a DVD-RAM is, no-one else I know has such a player either. The discs you make would be confined to the actual DVD recorder itself which is heavily restrictive.

Originally posted by Eug:
These are NOT incompatible formats. If you burn a +R disc, it will likely play in a DVD player. If you burn a -R disc, it will likely play in a DVD player. This is NOT a beta vs. VHS argument at all.

They ARE incompatible, it's doesn't get any simpler - my 30 DVD+RW discs CANNOT WILLNOT and SHALLNOT burn on my Mac. I must buy all new DVD-RW discs - then I have two entirely different sets of blank DVD discs, some will burn ONLY on my Mac some will burn ONLY on my DVD recorder. That is utterly pathetic.

What if Apple still supported DVD-RAM instead of DVD-R - would you still be supportive of the situation, despite having to buy two entirely different libraries of blank media? What if CDs worked that way - would it make sense to buy blank discs that are purely for music and other blank discs that are purely for data? Personally I just grab a blank disc and use it for whatever it is I needed at the time.

[Eug]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
not one of them would be able to use a DVD-RW with its incompatible stuff nor even know what a DVD-RAM is, no-one else I know has such a player either. The discs you make would be confined to the actual DVD recorder itself which is heavily restrictive.

My main DVD player (not a recorder) plays DVD-RAM, etc. (I bought it several years ago, before I even had a DVD burner.) DVD-RAM capable DVD players now cost less than US$100.

What if Apple still supported DVD-RAM instead of DVD-R - would you still be supportive of the situation, despite having to buy two entirely different libraries of blank media?

Both Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X support DVD-RAM, and will continue to do so. No drivers to install - just plug in the drive and go. I use both DVD-RAM and DVD-R. The former for data, and the latter for video. I also use DVD-RW at times, but mainly for testing video before burning to DVD-R.

You can use both Windows FAT32 and Mac HFS+ with DVD-RAM. Using HFS+ on Macs is particularly useful for data purposes, for obvious reasons.

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Eug:
Both Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X support DVD-RAM, and will continue to do so. No drivers to install - just plug in the drive and go.[/B]

I was talking about Apple, as in the Macintosh computer having a physical DVD-RAM drive in it, not the damn software (Windows has had DVD-RAM support for years, BFD not relevant).

Since you've explained you happily use different formats anyway there's no point debating the stupidity of it with you - you find it okay, I find it pathetic. My entire point from the beginning was merely that -RW and +RW are not the same thing - but you say they are, even though they are different right down to the way in which the phase change in the burning process works, but oh well.

I've used DVD-RAM for backup purposes on my server for quite a few years now - best format for that due to the random access nature, error correction, and use of caddys (important for media that's being handled by unknown people every day of the year). That, however, is different from a domestic home situation where I wouldn't for one second consider it acceptable that consumers should be told to use different types of DVD and CD discs for different purposes... WTF for, other than feed the pockets of multiple different industries?

[Eug]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
I was talking about Apple, as in the Macintosh computer having a physical DVD-RAM drive in it, not the damn software (Windows has had DVD-RAM support for years, BFD not relevant).

You seem to have a very angry view of Apple's choices. Well, it's not just Apple software, it's actually the OS itself. If you go to the local store, buy a DVD-RAM capable drive, plug the drive in, it works right away. No BFD? Well, it seems a big deal to you that this same data support is not included for +RW.

Apple has already made it's choices, and ones I happen to think are fine. It just sounds like you're annoyed that they've made choices that you don't happen to agree with.

[DVD Plaza]

I don't want DVD-RAM on my PowerBook - I never said I did and I have no use for it.

I don't want an external drive on my PowerBook - it'd be stupid, inconvenient, and unnecessary.

I merely stated that -RW and +RW are NOT as identical as you claimed. At your request (strangely in disbelief) I then elaborted on the many annoying attributes of -RW. YOU then brought up the topic of it being entirely acceptable for consumers to live in a world where they use an entirely different blank DVD disc for computer and settop use.

I strongly disagree with this stance, it's an absolutely pathetic situation, but somehow now you claim I'm angry with Apple. APPLE?!? Since when have they been on the DVD Consortium? Besides, I only returned to the Mac 1 year ago - my frustration with recordable DVD formats dates back 3-4 years... WTF?!?

[Rational_User]

Two more points for this discussion:

1. DVD-Ram media are expensive (3-6 times the price of +rw/-rw).

2. The places I have seen so far do not sell 2x DVD-RW. However, they all sell 2.4 x DVD+RW for about the same price as 1x DVD-RW.

If the general availabillity of 2x media is not quickly improved and also if 4x speed DVD-RW drives/media are not introduced soon (some DVD+RW drives available today can write to DVD+RW at 4x speed) than DVD-RW will be the looser format.

Despite the high price, I would still welcome DVD-Ram support on the Powerbook UJ-815, because you do not have to write the entire disk at once, but can physically write to it as if it were a second hard-disk. That is also worth the additional cost. However, DVD+RW is said to support this too (with proper Software support). I do not know how DVD-RW handles this.

It is unsatisfactory that large disks like DVDs have to be burned at once (for example on the UJ-815 with apple software or toast). Is there any software that properly supports multi-session or even Mt. Rainier for DVDs ?

RU

[coconut]

Does everything discussed here apply to DVD-R and DVD+R?

Dvdplaza, are you saying that we might be left behind 2-3-4 years from now, e.g. when everybody is using DVD+R(W) discs, and that we won't be able to read them with our 2-3-4 year-old powerbooks?

[Jacket]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
All cars drive on the road but that hardly makes them all equal.

DVD- and DVD+ are quite different, in fact I consider DVD- to be a crock of - gimme DVD+ anyday.

Apple DVD media is DVD-, allegedly, only DVD-Rs will work in the superdrive. atleast, that's what the apple store guy told me.

[mkincaid]

Dvdplaza, are you saying that we might be left behind 2-3-4 years from now, e.g. when everybody is using DVD+R(W) discs, and that we won't be able to read them with our 2-3-4 year-old powerbooks? [/B]

No - even if/when one format ends up winning hands down over the other (and so far, it still seems like as much of a dead heat as it was 2-3-4 years ago because set-tops STILL haven't taken off, and the question probably won't be settled until they do) there will undoubtedly be media made in both formats for many, many years to come. What maker of blank discs would want to miss out on any possible sales of either one?

(A - drive can read a + disk and vice versa so the issue is only about blank media.)

[DVD Plaza]

I agree. This was the stance I took in an article I wrote last year:

Despite consumer confusion and fear of the �recordable DVD format war�, I see no reason to worry. DVD-RAM was not designed, nor is suitable, for movies so forget that. This leaves only DVD+RW and DVD-RW. Frankly, unless you want friends to record on your discs, it really doesn't matter which format you choose � the discs you make you will play on most players, it is just a matter of whether you want people with different recorders being able to record on your discs.

In the next 2-3 years Blu-Ray will be THE universal format of choice - for existing users the only impact will be whether blank media remains easily avilable, whether the price of the old media goes up (due to costs associated with manufacturing a product that is in low demand), or whether the price of the old media becomes dirt cheap (is dirt cheap to run off by that time?). Only time will tell.

[mkincaid]

DVD Plaza:
In the next 2-3 years Blu-Ray will be THE universal format of choice - for existing users the only impact will be whether blank media remains easily avilable, whether the price of the old media goes up (due to costs associated with manufacturing a product that is in low demand), or whether the price of the old media becomes dirt cheap (is dirt cheap to run off by that time?). Only time will tell.

What's to prevent Blu-Ray from getting into a +/- like situation all over again? (not a rhetorical question... I know little about it.) Has its writable spec already been standardized?

[DVD Plaza]

Blu-Ray IS a writable spec - all bar only a few companies are behind the format, which they all agreed was important to avoid another DVD-RAM/DVD-RW/DVD+RW situation.

[Eug]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
Blu-Ray IS a writable spec - all bar only a few companies are behind the format, which they all agreed was important to avoid another DVD-RAM/DVD-RW/DVD+RW situation.

I should point out that the whole point of DVD-RAM/DVD-RW/DVD-R was to avoid a format war.

+RW/+R didn't come along until later.

But in the end, it's still not a humungous problem.

If you burn a +R disc, a DVD player will likely play it. If you burn a -R disc, a DVD player will likely play it. It is NOT a beta vs. VHS war at all.

While people continue to argue that -RAM/-RW/-R is not their fave, I continue to use them every day happily with my Mac (and my PC). And of course, my burned discs work fine on peoples computers and DVD players. Apple has made its choices and I think it's a good one. (OTOH, if you want + support, Toast works just fine with + drives, and LG/Hitachi has just released an ALL format drive with DVD-RAM/-RW/-R/+RW/+R.)

Furthermore a lot of people have made the same choices. The major portion of the home DVD recorder market is owned by DVD-RAM/-R machines. In the home computer market, the major portion of the market is DVD-RW/-R.

Regardless of what you think of the technology, - is here to stay. What about in 3 years? Well, in three years I'd usually upgrade my computer hardware anyway. I'll think about it then.

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Eug:
I should point out that the whole point of DVD-RAM/DVD-RW/DVD-R was to avoid a format war.

I can't see how anyone could have claimed that? DVD-RAM was designed specifically for data and is utterly incompatible with standard DVD players, so it meant from day one there would be multiple formats. DVD- was developed with the backing of only a handful of the consortium, which meant a split right from the beginning (biggest reason being DVD- had no intention of being compatible with existing DVD, they only hacked that in at the last minute hence why the two different modes of use). DVD+ was developed by the rest. The format war was there from day one.

Originally posted by Eug:
The major portion of the home DVD recorder market is owned by DVD-RAM/-R machines. In the home computer market, the major portion of the market is DVD-RW/-R.

make it sound like that "major portion" is a lot larger than the "other portion", which is incorrect. And since most of the IT industry supports DVD+, the penetration of DVD+ has been happening a lot quicker than DVD- so those two percentages have been changing.

[mkincaid]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
Blu-Ray IS a writable spec - all bar only a few companies are behind the format, which they all agreed was important to avoid another DVD-RAM/DVD-RW/DVD+RW situation.

i thought there was a competitor, too, called AOD or something. Is it dead?

[Eug]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
I can't see how anyone could have claimed that? DVD-RAM was designed specifically for data and is utterly incompatible with standard DVD players, so it meant from day one there would be multiple formats. DVD- was developed with the backing of only a handful of the consortium, which meant a split right from the beginning (biggest reason being DVD- had no intention of being compatible with existing DVD, they only hacked that in at the last minute hence why the two different modes of use). DVD+ was developed by the rest. The format war was there from day one.

make it sound like that "major portion" is a lot larger than the "other portion", which is incorrect. And since most of the IT industry supports DVD+, the penetration of DVD+ has been happening a lot quicker than DVD- so those two percentages have been changing.

1) DVD+RW originally wasn't supposed to be DVD Video compatible either. In fact, it was originally supposed to be used for computer data only, like DVD-RAM. Or at least that's what they said, which obviously has turned out to be false. Indeed, the first DVD+RW spec had discs less than 3 GB and they were totally incompatible with DVD players.

2) DVD-RAM/-R home recorders have over half of the home market, at least according to some Asian stats.

3) DVD-RW/-R computer recorders have the most market share, but I'm not sure by how big a margin at this time.

[DVD Plaza]

Reminds me of SACD - that insisted to absolutely not be a competitor to DVD-Audio, but to instead purely be a high end audio format, yet competing against DVD-Audio is exactly what its mission is!

[mkincaid]

Originally posted by DVD Plaza:
Reminds me of SACD - that insisted to absolutely not be a competitor to DVD-Audio, but to instead purely be a high end audio format, yet competing against DVD-Audio is exactly what its mission is!

Frankly, I don't believe either one is really going to take off. 5/6/7 channel sound makes sense for movies because they're mixed for cinematic production and most cinemas have digital multi-channel sound anyway. The same doesn't apply for music, and there don't seem to be signs that such a transition is happening (or that anyone is especially clamoring for it). Similarly, it seems that beyond the truly picky audiophiles, there's little demand for the added bit depth, etc of either format (heck, the trend is going going the other way with MP3/AAC - compression that uses less space but clever encoding to still sound good).

[DVD Plaza]

Yay, I thought I was the only one that felt that way! I see it from a worse perspective though - consumers are quite dumb and they have digital music on digital discs (CD), give them one good reason why they need to use a different digital disc?

Movies were different, VHS to DVD is like paper to a computer. Yet a similar situation will be coming in a few years time with HD-DVD - trying to convince consumers to upgrade from DVD to HD-DVD, most will wonder why.

[Mac Zealot]

can anyone say dvd+ fanboy?

I bet you have windows xp "Media Center" edition running on your tv and a pocket PC in your pcoket right?

[DVD Plaza]

Originally posted by Mac Zealot:
can anyone say dvd+ fanboy?

* I use DVD-RAM on my server
* I use DVD+RW in my home theatre
* I have, and thus will start using, DVD-R on my PowerBook
* I have enough brains and rights to decide for myself that, yes, I think DVD+ is the better format

Originally posted by Mac Zealot:
I bet you have windows xp "Media Center" edition running on your tv and a pocket PC in your pcoket right?

*I don't have Windows XP (I don't even have any PCs anymore) nor would I want a computer in my home theatre
*I don't have a TV (my home theatre uses a projector)
* There is nothing in my pockets (still in my cycling gear actually, been flat out this evening).

[mkincaid]

Movies were different, VHS to DVD is like paper to a computer. Yet a similar situation will be coming in a few years time with HD-DVD - trying to convince consumers to upgrade from DVD to HD-DVD, most will wonder why. [/B]

Well it would be nice if all Blu-Ray sets supported HD-DVD and vice versa. Blu-Ray will be a compelling upgrade because it works much better for home recording and VCR/TiVo like use, and also has other desirable features such as protective cartridges. Then when people get new sets for Blu-Ray they would have HD-DVD compatibility too.

[Eug]

Originally posted by mkincaid:
Well it would be nice if all Blu-Ray sets supported HD-DVD and vice versa. Blu-Ray will be a compelling upgrade because it works much better for home recording and VCR/TiVo like use, and also has other desirable features such as protective cartridges. Then when people get new sets for Blu-Ray they would have HD-DVD compatibility too.

I already use DVD-RAM for TiVo-like features (without the monthly payments), and DVD-RAM can be used in protective cartridges. Also, there are already several units out there that have hard drives. These include DVD-RAM machines, but I believe DVD-RW and DVD+RW machines will also have hard drives very soon (if they aren't already out).

By the way, my favourite feature (as I've mentioned before) of the TiVo-like random-access functionality of DVD-RAM is the ability to watch a show while it's being recorded (on the same disc), but at a different spot in the show. ie. Start recording at 6 pm. At 6:15 start watching the show, skipping over the commercials. By 7 pm because you've skipped the commercials you've only got 5 minutes left of the show to watch.

The main advantage of Blu-Ray is the higher resolution, and of course the longer recording time for standard definition. I'll probably get Blu-Ray 2-3 years after it's available in North America. And I don't even think it will get here until 2004. Even though I'll lust after it, I'm not willing to pay the $$$$$ for it. After 3 years the price will have dropped enough for my liking I'm sure.