[Chris_G]

Originally posted by asxless:

Could you do another test on your Maxell 8x DVD-R media using the OS X built in DVD burning (aka Finder / Disk Utility)? The OS X burner stores a temporary disc image that it burns in one fell swoop. This may allow for faster burns on the same media.

For example, I just retested the Apple 8x media by burning 4.1 GB using the Finder Burn Disc technique. The Finder took well over 18 minutes to copy the data from an external firewire drive into the temporary disc image. BUT it only took (just over) 12 minutes to burn this disc image to the DVD-R So Apple media did burn this 4.1 GB at roughly 8x.

FWIW this is the same technique I have used for all of my DVD-R burns since getting my new PowerBook. Memorex 8x DVD-Rs have consistently burned at 4X while Apple 8x media burns at 8X.

-- asxless in iLand

I will do so over the weekend, and let you know!

[tooki]

Originally posted by Chris_G:
... Toast begins to burn my DVD and the clock reads 6:32 (i.e. it should take 6:32 to burn the DVD), however, the clock doesn't progress in real time (i.e. one second of progress takes 3-4 real clock seconds). Someone over there mentioned that had seen this before, and that it seemed as if there was a bug either in the OS or the firmware. Kind of a bummer... hope someone figures out a fix!

I'm afraid your drive is functioning perfectly.

The confusion is a combination of people not noticing the details of burning speeds, and of Toast's sometimes-naive time calculations.

Modern optical drives, both when reading and writing, NEVER average to their maximum speed. Let's explore why.

When optical media were first designed, they were for time-constant media (such as digital audio in the CD). Therefore, the speed of the track under the read head had to be constant. Since the length of a track -- which is the circumference at that radius -- in one rotation grows as the radius grows (you know, diameter x pi = circumference), all early drives would slow down the rotation of the disc as the read head moved outwards from the center. This system is called constant linear velocity (CLV).

In a CD (that is, 1x speed), the rotational speed at the center is somewhere around 600 RPM, while at the outer edge it's only about 200 RPM, in order to maintain a constant data rate of about 175KB/sec.

Well, in data drives, that proved to be a problem as drive speeds increased, because in data use, the drive motor has to change the rotational speed often, in big jumps. At 4x, the min/max rotational speeds were about 800/2400 RPM, at 16x 3200/9600. As you can see, as the drive's speed (expressed as X) grows, the difference in RPM between the center and edge grows, so the motor has to be stronger and stronger in order to create the acceleration or deceleration needed. And it takes time to do so. (Also, any higher rotational speeds would cause the discs to vibrate and shatter, which is why single-laser CD drives topped out at 52x max.)

So, with the release of 24x drives, they decided to ditch this, and switch to a system where the motor always spins the disc at the same RPM, and in turn the data rate changes. This system is called constant angular velocity (CAV). In such drives, the speed listed is always the maximum speed, namely the one achieved at the outermost edge. In a 24x drive, the innermost area of the disc is only read at 10x. ALL drives made beginning with 24x involve a maximum speed that is not maintained throughout.

In an effort to improve speeds a bit, the drive makers later introduced something called "zoned CLV", where both methods are merged. In short, the disc is divided into 3 concentric zones, and for each zone, the disc is rotated at a constant speed. As with CAV, the listed speed is only achieved at the outer edge, but now, it picks up the speed twice during burning. All modern drives use either CAV or zoned CLV. In the latter ones, it's why you hear the drive spin up twice during a burn.

The problem is, Toast bases its burn time only off of the top speed of the fastest zone, and doesn't take the other, slower, zones (nor the fact that the burn speed isn't constant within them) into account.

And since optical discs are read and written from the center out (and the fastest region is the very outside), you will never achieve the maximum speed unless the disc is filled to the brim. Apple's tech specs reflect this by always listing the drive speed as "up to whatever-x speed".

tooki

[tooki]

P.S. The PowerBook tech specs page even specifically lists the SuperDrive as using Zoned CLV (ZCLV) when writing DVDs.

[TailsToo]

I picked up some of the Memorex 8x -R DVDs today at CompUSA ($7.99 for a 25 pack with no rebates.. Apple wants $34.99 for their 25 pack!)) and they burn at 8x with my 1.67's SuperDrive.

[asxless]

Originally posted by TailsToo:
I picked up some of the Memorex 8x -R DVDs today at CompUSA ($7.99 for a 25 pack with no rebates.. Apple wants $34.99 for their 25 pack!)) and they burn at 8x with my 1.67's SuperDrive.

Hmmmm...

Could you provide a few more details of how you got the Memorex 8x DVD-R media to burn at 8x? Did you use the Finder or 3rd party disc burning? Does the media report that it is capable of 8X in the Finder? Did you burn a nearly full DVD (over 4GB)? Did you time the burn?

FWIW I've burned a half dozen nearly full (over 4GB) Memorex 8x DVD-R s in my 1.67 mHz PowerBook and they have consistently taken around 30 minutes to "burn". By "burn" I mean the time between the lead in and lead out as reported by the Finder Burn Disc progress window. AFAIK 120/30 => 4x. And I have done the same test using Apple's 8x media which took just under 12 minutes (120/12=> approx 8x).

Thanks in advance -- asxless in iLand

[asxless]

Originally posted by tooki:
...Modern optical drives, both when reading and writing, NEVER average to their maximum speed. Let's explore why.....And since optical discs are read and written from the center out (and the fastest region is the very outside), you will never achieve the maximum speed unless the disc is filled to the brim. Apple's tech specs reflect this by always listing the drive speed as "up to whatever-x speed".

tooki

Very impressive. BUT...
Apparently your vast knowledge of CD and DVD specs, codes, etc has caused you to miss the very simple message here.
Regardless of the how a DVD drive accomplishes it...

1x = 120 minutes to read (or Burn) a full DVD (4.5GB)
2x = 60 minutes
4x = 30 minutes
8x = 15 minutes

The 8x Superdrives in the new PowerBooks will, in fact, burn a full (4+GB) DVD in under 15 minutes using Apple's 8x media. BUT these same drives using the same burning technique are _frequently_ reported to take more time to burn when using other name brands of 8x DVD-R media (e.g. Memorex). OTOH there are _some_ reports that other name brands do burn at 8X.

Obviously I can't speak for anyone else, but what I am looking for is _solid reports_ on what DVD-R media (other than Apple's) will burn a full (4+GB) DVD-R in under 15 minutes using my new PowerBook's 8x SuperDrive.

-- asxless in iLand

[TailsToo]

Originally posted by asxless:
Hmmmm...

Could you provide a few more details of how you got the Memorex 8x DVD-R media to burn at 8x? Did you use the Finder or 3rd party disc burning? Does the media report that it is capable of 8X in the Finder? Did you burn a nearly full DVD (over 4GB)? Did you time the burn?

FWIW I've burned a half dozen nearly full (over 4GB) Memorex 8x DVD-R s in my 1.67 mHz PowerBook and they have consistently taken around 30 minutes to "burn". By "burn" I mean the time between the lead in and lead out as reported by the Finder Burn Disc progress window. AFAIK 120/30 => 4x. And I have done the same test using Apple's 8x media which took just under 12 minutes (120/12=> approx 8x).

Thanks in advance -- asxless in iLand

I used toast and I was basing the time on burning about 4GB of data... both the Apple media and the Memorex would take about 15 mins.

[Yonidass]

asxless,

Regarding your speeds:

1x = 120 minutes to read (or Burn) a full DVD (4.5GB)
2x = 60 minutes
4x = 30 minutes
8x = 15 minutes


I believe these numbers are doubled. I have a 1x Toshiba in my Pismo and a full 4.4 GB has always taken 55 min or so to burn with Toast. My new PB burning at 2x according to Toast took about 25 minutes. I believe then that 8x should be 7 or 8 minutes.

Here's a great DVD FAQ site:

http://dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html

And specifically regarding burn times:

http://dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html#4.3.8

[asxless]

Originally posted by Yonidass:
asxless,

Regarding your speeds:

1x = 120 minutes to read (or Burn) a full DVD (4.5GB)
2x = 60 minutes
4x = 30 minutes
8x = 15 minutes


I believe these numbers are doubled. I have a 1x Toshiba in my Pismo and a full 4.4 GB has always taken 55 min or so to burn with Toast. My new PB burning at 2x according to Toast took about 25 minutes. I believe then that 8x should be 7 or 8 minutes.

Thanks for the link Yonidass.

I'm happy to be wrong about my simple 'DVD burn times table' as long as the correct times are SHORTER And I'd be absolutely ecstatic to be able to burn a full DVD-R in 7-8min with my PowerBook's 8x drive. But even with Apple's 8x media the best I've seen is just under 12 min for 4.1GB burned via the Finder's Burn Disc technique.

FWIW my simple 'DVD burn times table' is based on the stated 120 min capacity (read play time) for video recorded on a DVD-R. AFAIK this represents the base "1x speed". But as I said before, I love to discover that I am wrong, as long as 1x is FASTER.

-- asxless in iLand

[tooki]

Again, the burn speed on an "8x" drive and an "8x max" drive will not be the same.

The drive in the PBs is 8x max, and cannot be expected to complete a write in 1/8 the time of a 1x drive, because it's only writing at 8x at the very end of a full-disc burn. On average, it's burning substantially below 8x, and that is exactly what people are reporting. I know it's not what you want to hear, but it's how it is.

tooki

P.S. And again, in case anyone thinks media compatibility should be universal, look at the spec sheets for Plextor's DVD writers. Plextor is widely considered the gold standard in burners, and they specifically list the "recommended" media that is supposed to achieve top burn speeds. For example, to burn at 16x, the PX716 recommends either Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden media, while far more brands are recommended for 8x and slower.

[tooki]

1x DVD burning is 60 minutes, give or take. The reason you're thinking 120 minutes is because most movie DVDs are dual-layer, which allows two hours at the maximum bitrate. DVD-R is single-layer only, at just over half the capacity of a dual-layer disc.

tooki

[U n i o n 0015]

tooki,

So you're saying that if they came out with a 40X DVD burner, it'd make sense for it to only be burning at 2X? Sorry dude, but you're completely wrong. It makes sense that the drive should default to a "safe" write speed, but not that it should do this for darn near every media out there.

It says this exactly on Apple's site:

"Order a PowerBook with a SuperDrive, and you have an even more potent optical drive at your disposal, one that allows you to burn DVDs faster than ever: up to 8x speed."

Sorry, but last time I checked, I'm NOT burning DVDs faster than ever. In fact, I'm burning them at the same 2X that the SuperDrives two years ago were capable of burning.

Now I understand you seem to have a lot of knowledge on this stuff, but I really think don't think you're comprehending this problem completely. My friend has a 16X DVD burner...Pioneer model. He bought it because it BURNS NEAR 16X with most every type of media. He can crank out a 4GB DVD in 3-4 minutes.

Using your logic, explain why every other burner I've ever owned has burned at its advertised burn speed, except for this one SuperDrive?

Is it really that hard to swallow that there might be something going on with the drive or do you really believe that Apple would never put out a faulty product? If so, check Apple's homepage for the PowerBook battery safety recall or the iBook logic board one if you need convincing. Or, go out and buy one of these new PowerBooks and when you have the same problems so many of are having, come back and comment instead of trying to tech support a problem is obviously deeper than a simple tech explanations.

[asxless]

I stand corrected. And twice as angry...

... because the problem with the 8x SuperDrive in my new PowerBook is twice as bad as I thought. It doesn't even burn Apple 8x media at 8x.

If 1x = 60min then
2x = 30 min
4x = 15 min
8x = 7.5 min

Based on my tests using the OS X Finder to burn nearly full DVD-Rs, the 8x SuperDrive in my new PowerBook will only burn at
* 4x (roughly 15 min/4+GB) on Apple's own branded 8x DVD-R media and
* a measly 2x (roughly 30min/4+GB) on Memorex 8x DVD-R media

-- asxless in iLand

[U n i o n 0015]

Oh, I should add that if you go to Apple's Hardware page, and then go to the "SuperDrive" tab, it clearly says--in big 'ole letters--8X DVD burning across the line.

Not close-to-8X DVD burning, not 8X DVD burning with only Apple media, not up-to-8X DBD burning, but 8X DVD burning across the line.

I am 100% positive that Apple meant that the new SuperDrive is an 8X burner.

[Chris_G]

Originally posted by asxless:
Chris,

I've read your posts on the Apple discussion boards. Apple's media clearly has a Maxell code (MXL RG03). So I was hoping that you had unlocked the key to finding another 'brand' of 8x media that actually burned at 8x with these new PowerBook DVD burners.

Could you do another test on your Maxell 8x DVD-R media using the OS X built in DVD burning (aka Finder / Disk Utility)? The OS X burner stores a temporary disc image that it burns in one fell swoop. This may allow for faster burns on the same media.

For example, I just retested the Apple 8x media by burning 4.1 GB using the Finder Burn Disc technique. The Finder took well over 18 minutes to copy the data from an external firewire drive into the temporary disc image. BUT it only took (just over) 12 minutes to burn this disc image to the DVD-R So Apple media did burn this 4.1 GB at roughly 8x.

FWIW this is the same technique I have used for all of my DVD-R burns since getting my new PowerBook. Memorex 8x DVD-Rs have consistently burned at 4X while Apple 8x media burns at 8X.

-- asxless in iLand

As promised, here are my results. Burned (via the Finder) a 4.2GB DVD, both on my PowerBook and my wife's iMac (Pioneer DVR-104... max write speed of 4x). The files were a backup of my documents folder... so many varying file sizes. Anyway, the times (listed from the time the drive actually started burning the files to the time it finished burning the files):

DVR-104 - 14 minutes, 43 seconds (burned at 4x)
UJ-835e - 14 minutes, 11 seconds (burned at 8x)

Times were clocked with a handheld timer.

So... as you can see, I don't think this is 8x, even if you take into account the "burns up to 8x" argument. This is 4x burning... plain and simple. I would expect 8x to be at least close to 2x as fast as 4x and it isn't. If this is the way 8x drives work, I smell a class action lawsuit on the drive companies hands. Anyway, still waiting for Apple to do something about this, although the problem certainly isn't a deal breaker for me... I still really like my new PowerBook!

Cheers!
Chris

[asxless]

Originally posted by Chris_G:
As promised, here are my results. Burned (via the Finder) a 4.2GB DVD, both on my PowerBook and my wife's iMac (Pioneer DVR-104... max write speed of 4x). The files were a backup of my documents folder... so many varying file sizes. Anyway, the times (listed from the time the drive actually started burning the files to the time it finished burning the files):

DVR-104 - 14 minutes, 43 seconds (burned at 4x)
UJ-835e - 14 minutes, 11 seconds (burned at 8x)

Times were clocked with a handheld timer....

Thanks Chris. These were a big help.

The good news is that you've demonstrated that Maxell 8x disks perform equivalent to Apple 8x disks.

The bad news is that Apple's claim that these new PowerBooks have an "8x SuperDrive DVD�RW/CD-RW" with technical specs of "SuperDrive (DVD�RW/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x ZCLV..." is, at the very best, deceptive* (at least at this time). Hopefully Apple will offer a software/firmware upgrade to make these "8x drives" burn DVD-R media at something approaching 8x. As it stands, a more accurate spec for these drives would read " writes DVD-R discs at 4x, but only if you use 8x media from a limited number of manufactures."

Like you, this DVD write speed issue is not a deal breaker. It simply further erodes my opinion of Apple's quality control or forthright customer communications or both.

-- asxless in iLand

* even if you buy into Tookie's 'it burns 8x for some part of the burn' defense of how Apple can say that it "writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x ZCLV", this spec is still very deceptive when viewed from the stand point of even a fairly sophisticated PowerBook buyer.

[tooki]

Originally posted by asxless:
If 1x = 60min then
2x = 30 min
4x = 15 min
8x = 7.5 min

The point I have been trying to get through to you is that if ANY of those doublings in speed also employ a change in write strategy (CAV/PCAV/CLV/PCLV), then you can't just divide the time in two. This was a common gripe with 24x max burners (the first ones to not use pure CAV), because people expected them to be twice as fast as a 12x model, and they just plain aren't.

I understand that your gripe is that it doesn't seem to work with any media, but you've conveniently ignored that my long post about write strategies was a response to someone else's post.

A good way to check real burn speed is to use Activity Monitor to check the outgoing data stream (launch Activity Monitor, open the window if needed by pressing command-1, and click the Disk Activity tab, watch the red line). If, at the end of a full 4.7GB burn, it's sustaining about 10.5MB/sec, then the drive is burning at 8x max. If it's sustaining substantially less (like 5 or less MB/sec) then it's not burning at 8x max.

tooki

[asxless]

Originally posted by tooki:
The point I have been trying to get through to you is that if ANY of those doublings in speed also employ a change in write strategy (CAV/PCAV/CLV/PCLV), then you can't just divide the time in two. This was a common gripe with 24x max burners (the first ones to not use pure CAV), because people expected them to be twice as fast as a 12x model, and they just plain aren't.

I understand that your gripe is that it doesn't seem to work with any media, but you've conveniently ignored that my long post about write strategies was a response to someone else's post....i

Tookie,

I haven't ingored any fragment of your (very) long posts in this thread or on Apple's Discussion board.

I simply do not buy into any of it as a valid defense of Apple's advertising of the New PowerBook's SuperDrives as "8x DVD" burners. It's actually very simple. They either burn 8x DVD-R media at 1/8 th of 1x or they don't. And I am confident that Apple fully expected potential PowerBook purchasers to read "SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x ZCLV..." and take it to mean that "up to 8X" referred to the use of appropriate (i.e. 8x) media. If Apple didn't expect that inference, then they were/are not being forthright in their costumer communications.

Because expecting even a reasonably sophisticated PowerBook owner to read Apple's spec sheet for the new PoweBooks and encounter the part where it says ... "SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x ZCLV..." and say to themselves, ah yes, that means that I should really only expect to achieve DVD burns of roughly 4x even when I use 8x media is... well, silly. And that is why I think that if you are right about Apple's spec, then Apple was/is intentionally trying to deceive PowerBook buyers.

OTOH I hope that Apple was not intentionally trying to deceive me (and other new PowerBook buyers) and will soon offer a software/firmware patch that will allow these new PowerBook SuperDrives to actually burn DVD-R's at something approaching 8x.

-- asxless in iLand

[DVGuy]

This thread seems to be wandering. The firmware of the drive contains a "catalog" of supported media and burning strategies for each type. If the drive encounters a media type not in the cataloge, it will usually defualt to a "safe" (read: slower) speed. The problem is that the firmware that this drive ships with is clearly too restrictive in terms of the media it will recognize and burn at 8x with. What we really need is a firmware upgrade, which will only happen if those who have the PowerBook affected complain directly to Apple.

[Chris_G]

Sustainable rate at the end of a 4.7GB burn is about 8 MB/s... less than 10.5 MB/s but faster than a 4x burner (about 5.4 MB/s). Speeds at the beginning of the burn are about 2.3 MB/s, in the middle 5.4 MB/s and only at the very end (i.e. the last 1 minute or so) do I see 8 MB/s. On the other hand, the DVR-104 sustains a rate of 5.4 MB/s for the entire burn. If this is truely what an 8x burner is suppose to do whats the point? Its no faster than a 4x burner... plain and simple. Does this type of burning strategy conserve power? If so, great, but don't label the burner as an 8x burner. To me, this still seems like misleading advertising.

Cheers!
Chris

[asxless]

Originally posted by DVGuy:
...The problem is that the firmware that this drive ships with is clearly too restrictive in terms of the media it will recognize and burn at 8x with. ...

Actually there are TWO problems with this drive.

The one you mention -- the very restrictive 8x media compatibility list, which FWIW is my main gripe.

But even when running the latest OS X 10.3.8 upgrade and drive firmware, these "8x" drives actually burn DVD-Rs at roughly 4X (15 min/4+GB) on ANY media, even Apple's 8x certified DVD-R media.

-- asxless in iLand

[chabig]

Originally posted by tooki:
In a CD (that is, 1x speed), the rotational speed at the center is somewhere around 600 RPM, while at the outer edge it's only about 200 RPM

Tooki, for a solid piece of rotating media it would be truly miraculous for the center to rotate at a different angular velocity than the outer edge. I know that you really wanted to say that the outer edge has a higher linear velocity than the center.

Chris

[asxless]

Originally posted by TailsToo:
I picked up some of the Memorex 8x -R DVDs today at CompUSA ($7.99 for a 25 pack with no rebates.. Apple wants $34.99 for their 25 pack!)) and they burn at 8x with my 1.67's SuperDrive.

A possible explanation of our different burning results on 8x Memorex media...

According to www.videohelp.com Memorex distributes media from different manufactures.

http://www.videohelp.com/dvdmedia.ph...+or+List+Media

The discs I am using are coded CMC MAG. AE1 but apparently Memorex also distributes media coded as MCC 02RG20. And this just happens to be the same code as Verbatim, Edit: one of the few: other 8x media that has been reported to "burn at 8x" in the new PowerBook SuperDrives.

BTW anyone interested in knowing the codes on your DVD media can use the beta of new application called "DVD Media Inspector". The GUI is a little crude but it works

-- asxless in iLand

[sideus]

My PowerBook 1GHz Superdrive is advertised to burn at 2x. However, I'm currently using Fuji DVD-RW rated at 2x that have yet to burn at 2x. 1x all the way.

But I don't mind as I do not burn many DVDs. I've read this whole thread and I really think tooki is on the money about this. If you all were wanting to pump out DVDs like muffins in an Easy Bake Oven, I probably would have looked into purchasing a desktop system and/or external DVD burner.

[Simon]

I believe Tooki is right here too, but still I have a bad feeling about Apple advertising 8x when actually it's not. Of course Apple isn't on its own here, the drive manufacturers all call these drives 8x, but it seems it's just plain wrong, because there is no drive available that burns a 4+ GB DVD-R in 7.5 minutes. I don't care if it's because of different RPMs or different radial positions of the laser, or anything else. If manufacturers write 8x, I want to see burns in 7.5 minutes. Maybe they should call these drives 6x or 4.5x or whatever, but if they say 8x and there is no such thing as a 7.5 minute burn, I think the manufacturers should be sued. We've seen this happen again and again with consumer electronics (screen diagonals, HD capacity, etc.) and I don't see why people should accept the fact that companies try to deliberately deceive us. The best solution would be advertise maximum burning times. Instead of these meaningless multipliers, they should advertise DVDs as burning under 15 or 30 minutes - and then live up to it!

That said, Apple isn't to blame alone, but they're part of a false advertising campaign. OTOH, I love my PowerBook and don't burn more DVDs than maybe once every other week. So I could care less if it takes 10 or 20 minutes, but I just don't like to be suckered by companies advertising more than they can deliver.

On another note, I don't care what other media could burn 8x on my PowerBook's burner. If I know Apple's does, I'll just buy that one. Heck, why should I care about Verbatim or Memorex or any other brand. Apple's media isn't expensive and it works. I'll buy a couple of boxes and be done with it. What's the hassle with finding out some exotic brand delivering 8x on these burners when we already have an inexpensive supply of working media?

[tooki]

Originally posted by chabig:
Tooki, for a solid piece of rotating media it would be truly miraculous for the center to rotate at a different angular velocity than the outer edge. I know that you really wanted to say that the outer edge has a higher linear velocity than the center.

No, you are misreading what I wrote. What I meant is that when the innermost track is being read, the disc is rotated at 600 RPM, and when the outermost track is being read, the disc is rotated at 200 RPM. I never implied that those were the simultaneous rotational speeds, which should be obvious since the read assembly cannot be at the inside and outer edges at the same time.. I had made clear that what is held constant is the linear speed under the read assembly, which requires the rotational speed to be reduced as the read moves outward.

tooki

[tooki]

Originally posted by Simon:
Of course Apple isn't on its own here, the drive manufacturers all call these drives 8x, but it seems it's just plain wrong, because there is no drive available that burns a 4+ GB DVD-R in 7.5 minutes.

The 16x desktop burners *might*!

tooki

[tooki]

Originally posted by asxless:
... but apparently Memorex also distributes media coded as MCC 02RG20.

MCC probably stands for Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation -- Verbatim's parent company.

But remember that cheaper companies may have bought their stampers from reputable manufacturers, but then made the discs differently. From some companies, the coding may not be reliable.

tooki

[Simon]

Originally posted by tooki:
The 16x desktop burners *might*!

I hope by the time they start selling those burners, the industry will still be recovering from a smack-ass class action lawsuit that forced them to call the burners 8 minute burners instead of 16x implying some 3.25 minute fantasy burning time.

[tooki]

But the drive industry would probably just go and argue that "Why should we have to list our average performance rather than the maximum? Car companies list their cars' maximum horsepower even though the engine only achieves it a small amount of the time!!"

tooki

[asxless]

Recapping, we have reports of 5 'brands' of 8x media that are recognized as 8x by these drives...

Apple (coded MXL RG03)
Maxell (coded MXL RG03)
Verbatim (could be coded MCC 02RG20 or TYG02)
Fuji - Yuden (probably coded TYG02)
Memorex* (could be coded as MCC 02RG20, CMC MAG. AE1, FUJIFILM03.., ProdiscF01.., or RITEKG05.... )

* Note: Memorex coded as CMC MAG. AE1 was _not_ recognized as 8x media.

So these new drives would only need to recognize 3 different 8x media codes to explain all of the reports so far - MXL RG03, MCC 02RG20 & TYG02. And the only way to be sure you get an 8x DVD-R with one of these three codes is to buy Apple, Maxell, Verbatim and Fuji - _Yuden_ brand media.

Hopefully this list will grow as more reports are posted.

-- asxless in iLand

ps the code information above is based on www.videohelp.com listings

[theJoKell]

Originally posted by tooki:
The 16x desktop burners *might*!

tooki

Please explain how my 16x dvd burner burns a DVD in under 5 mins at 12x. I mean, obviously it can't *really* burn at 12x according to your argument, that's just a maximum possible, not a sustained rate.

I need to get some 16x media, maybe those will burn at 8x and my drive will start functioning properly.

[tooki]

I don't know the write strategy your drive uses, but the desktop drives tend to be faster, period.

tooki

[theJoKell]

Originally posted by tooki:
I don't know the write strategy your drive uses, but the desktop drives tend to be faster, period.

tooki

Tooki, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Obviously they can be faster *first* since they don't have the same size and power requirements as a laptop drive. But once the technology grows (which it does quite quickly these days) there shouldn't be a problem running these things in a laptop.

A laptop drive that has been rated at 8x should burn AT (or at least somewhat near) 8x. If there's a technology limitation that keeps it from going beyond 4x, then it should be rated at 4x. There is absolutely NO excuse for this.


What I'd really like to see is tests from PC laptop users with 8x DVD burners. Think they're experiencing the same things?

[tooki]

It makes perfect sense. A desktop drive can use larger, more powerful motors that draw more electricity to achieve higher performance, and more sensitive electronics and optics to improve the optical assembly. All else held equal, desktop drives are faster. Of course, as time progresses, the laptop drives will catch up. I think that didn't need saying, since this is computer technology, and it seldom stays still.

As for it needing to run "at 8x" -- again, you need to define 8x. The 835E drive is an "8x max" drive, not an "8x" drive. (See below.)

Do I believe that a better speed labeling system is in order? Absolutely.

But the fact is, arguing to me that I'm wrong -- which I'm not -- is not helping things. You all seem to see me as an apologist for Apple (who doesn't even MAKE the darned drives!), but I am just trying to put this into perspective, and explain to you that while it's not as straightforward as it should be, it's not exactly false, either. Consumers often want a single number they can compare, typically in a "More is better!" fashion, but despite the way manufacturers label things, in most devices, a single number cannot explain overall performance.

By the way, an interesting thing I just found on a website that sells drives, and one that fully supports everything I've said: it lists the UJ-835 as an "up to 8x" drive, but it's discontinued. The successor, the UJ-845, is is explicitly listed as having "full 8x recording speed".

As for whether PC users see the same problems: of course. A given drive is going to behave the same regardless of what computer it's installed in.

tooki

[tooki]

And to support my last claim, look at http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=129339 . It's a PC user, reporting approximately 15-minute burn times with the UJ-845, and 10-minute burn times with the NEC 6500, and reporting media sensitivity, and reporting that while he'd hoped for better results, they're in line with what others are reporting.

So no, it's not just affecting Apple customers, and yes, the media is important.

tooki

[theJoKell]

Originally posted by tooki:
But the fact is, arguing to me that I'm wrong -- which I'm not -- is not helping things

Well that's it then, isn't it.

I don't think anyone here is disputing your facts about disc rotations, power consumption, motor strength, etc. The only thing we're disputing is the fact that these are 8x drives (or at least that they're burning at 8x).

The fact is, it doesn't matter if the laptop drive technology is behind the desktop drive technology. That just makes sense due to size restrictions. What does matter is the fact that these are advertised as 8x drives and yet the most anyone can get them to burn at is 4x (with Apple media). And before you say anything about "up to 8x," check out this:

[NO HUGE INLINE IMAGES --tooki]

Edit - Fine then, here's the link:
http://images.apple.com/powerbook/im...op20050125.jpg

Or this:

From http://www.apple.com/powerbook/superdrive.html
Faster-is-better types will warm up to the SuperDrive-equipped 12-inch, 15-inch and 17-inch PowerBook G4 computers. That�s because they all offer faster 8x DVD burning. And with SuperDrive models starting at just $1699, burning on the go has never been as speedy, easy or affordable.

They are not advertising "up to 8x burning," they are advertising 8x burning. These drives are not burning at 8x. There really shouldn't be any more discussion than that.

[tooki]

Read the tech specs on Apple's page, they clearly say "up to 8x". It also says "up to 8x speed" on the overview page (www.apple.com/powerbook/). I agree that the SuperDrive page should mention it, though.

tooki

[theJoKell]

Originally posted by tooki:
Read the tech specs on Apple's page, they clearly say "up to 8x". It also says "up to 8x speed" on the overview page (www.apple.com/powerbook/). I agree that the SuperDrive page should mention it, though.

tooki

Actually both of those pages show both the "up to 8x" and just the "8x burning" or "8x superdrive." So even those pages could be construed as advertising 8x burning...

From the tech specs page:
You can even order all three PowerBook models with the phenomenal 8x SuperDrive (DVD�RW/CD-RW) that lets you listen to CDs, watch DVDs, or burn CDs and DVDs of your own

and

Slot-loading optical drive

8x SuperDrive
DVD�RW/CD-RW

8x SuperDrive DVD�RW/CD-RW

From the overview page:
Want power to burn? The new PowerBook models offer 8x SuperDrives

[theJoKell]

And even still, if they were only advertising "up to 8x burning" on every page of their site, it would still be completely unacceptable. "Up to 8x burning" does not mean "burns at 4x" - which is what the problem is.

[U n i o n 0015]

Oh yeah, there's also this Panasonic Industrial Europe site that clearly says that the similar UJ-835B is an 8X speed writer.

http://www.panasonic-industrial.com/...nu/1111930_l2/

[tooki]

Originally posted by theJoKell:
And even still, if they were only advertising "up to 8x burning" on every page of their site, it would still be completely unacceptable. "Up to 8x burning" does not mean "burns at 4x" - which is what the problem is.

Fine, to Joe Consumer that's probably true. To me, as a techie, what they're saying is acceptable, because I know what the numbers all mean.

Panasonic Industrial's site definitely shouldn't be calling it an 8x drive without the qualifying "up to". But Apple -- the company you are buying the drive from -- is describing it exactly as it is. By the way, the "B" at the end of the Panasonic model numbers means "black" -- the color of the bezel.

tooki

[asxless]

Since the Apple spec sheet says

SuperDrive (DVD�RW/CD-RW):
writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x ZCLV,
writes DVD-RW at up to 4x ZCLV,
writes DVD+R discs at up to 8x ZCLV,
writes DVD+RW at up to 4x ZCLV...

does this mean that this drive is similarly crippled to roughly half the 'nominal spec' when writing to say 4x DVD-RW media (e.g. something closer to 2x - 30 min/4+GB)? Has anyone tried it yet?

For that matter, has anyone timed the burn of over 4GB of data on DVD-R 4x media? Was it 4x (e.g. around 15 min) or something closer to 2x (around 30 min)? In other words do we need to use 8x media to burn at 4x on these drives?

-- asxless in iLand

[theJoKell]

Originally posted by tooki:
Fine, to Joe Consumer that's probably true. To me, as a techie, what they're saying is acceptable, because I know what the numbers all mean.

See that's weird. Because, as a techie myself, I bought my external drive because I understood the 16x rating to mean it would burn discs AT 16x. And guess what? It does!

Weird how you don't hold Apple to the same standard though...

[Chris_G]

asxless:

That would require someone finding 4x media that burns at 4x! I would guess that Apple and Verbatim would, but beyond that its a crapshoot. I personally use to use 4x medita from Ritek (G04) and thought it was great... this drive only recognizes the media as 2x. Watching the data output stream via the activity monitor, a majority of the 8x burn was accomplished at 5+ MB/s, which is a 4x data stream, so I would see no reason that a 4x DVD burn would be much longer than the 15 minutes or so one would expect... not 30 minutes.

Chris

[tooki]

Originally posted by theJoKell:
See that's weird. Because, as a techie myself, I bought my external drive because I understood the 16x rating to mean it would burn discs AT 16x. And guess what? It does!

Weird how you don't hold Apple to the same standard though...

Then it's using a different write strategy. What part of that is so hard to understand?!?

tooki

[asxless]

Originally posted by Chris_G:
That would require someone finding 4x media that burns at 4x! I would guess that Apple and Verbatim would, but beyond that its a crapshoot...

Chris,

I would whole hearted agree, IF Apple actually sold _any_ DVD-RW media

So I guess us little chilluns is on our own to find which 4x DVD-RW media is/are compatible with our spankin' new sorta, kinda 8x SuperDrives

Let the search and burn tests begin....

-- asxless in iLand

[fortepianissimo]

Originally posted by tooki:
Then it's using a different write strategy. What part of that is so hard to understand?!?

tooki

I've watched this thread from the time when it started. I have to say that tooki took it really well - he was cool and trying to explain the reality. I'm not happy with the labeling of "8x" as well. But I would suggest that we complain this to Apple instead of spending time here arguing. I know I would.

[theJoKell]

Originally posted by fortepianissimo:
I've watched this thread from the time when it started. I have to say that tooki took it really well - he was cool and trying to explain the reality. I'm not happy with the labeling of "8x" as well. But I would suggest that we complain this to Apple instead of spending time here arguing. I know I would.

Problem is, when this issue is taken to the Apple Support forum tookie comes in and says it's working properly, when it obviously is not.

[tooki]

It IS working the way the Panasonic engineers wanted it to -- which isn't what you expected. It doesn't change the fact that arguing it over and over with me won't change a damned thing. I joined into this conversation to add a perspective of why it works how it does, and how they arrived at the numbers they did. Is it deceptive on their part? That's for you to decide. But arguing it with me is stupid. (May I point out that I responded to this thread before you ever chimed in, and when you did, you were adversarial and condescending from the beginning?)

tooki