Ποιοί είναι οι πιο ποιοτικοί και ανθεκτικοί CD/DVD δισκοι;

[onefluffycloud]

Me thn eleysh twn fthnwn dvdr oloi exoume ti dinatothta na apothhkeyoume megales posothtes dedomenwn se dvd. etsi pio poly apo pote shmera einai shmantikh h poiothta twn DVD.

-Ayto pou thelw na mathw einai poia marka diskwn DVD, kata th gnwmh sas, paragei tous pio poiotikous,an8enktikous kai me antoxh sto xrono diskous.

Epipleon iparxei kamia diafora anamesa stous diskous DVD-R kai DVD+R oso anafora th poiothta?

nomizw pws eixa diavasei kapou sto internet oti oi dvd+r einai kalyteroi.

[ALR]

Πολύ καλά και φτηνά δισκάκια είναι τα intenso 0.50 λεπτά το ένα.Ποιότητα αναμφισβίτητη από τον καθέναν έχουν τα δισκάκια της TDK.

Στο πλαίσιο που είχα ρωτήσει την διαφορά από το + και - μου είχαν πεί οτί + είναι για ταινίες και - για δεδομένα.Μάλιστα ρωτούσαν τον κόσμο " Για τι τα θέλετε τα δισκάκια;" Και ανάλογα την απάντηση έδινε + ή - .

Βέβαια,με μια μικρή αναζήτηση στο ίντερνετ κατάλαβα οτί η μορφή + - δεν παίζει κάποιον ιδιαίτερο ρόλο στο αν θα αποθηκεύσεις δεδομένα ή αρχεία βίντεο.Απλώς μερικά dvd-players υποστηρίζουν + και δεν υποστηρίζουν - και το αντίστροφο..Όλες μου οι ταίνίες πάντως είναι σε μορφή - ;)

[verikets]

Εγώ θεωρώ ποιοτικά δισκάκια τα Verbatim και TDK. Τα DVD-R σε σχέση με τα DVD+R ειναι οντως φθηνοτερα, αλλα και πιο συμβατά (βλ εδώ).

[alfa 156]

Θα διαφωνήσω μαζί σου

 

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

 

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

Date June 2003

Author Michael Spath

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Pre-pits versus ADIP

 

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

 

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

 

http://gfx.cdfreaks.com/img/1056305539

 

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

 

http://gfx.cdfreaks.com/img/1056305592

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Defect management and recording quality

 

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

 

http://gfx.cdfreaks.com/img/1056305674

 

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

 

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

 

Although DVD-R(W) also support some defect management (Persistent-DM and DRT-DM), it is mainly software based and actions must always be initiated by a specific program. Furthermore, since DVD-RW format lacks the needed structures, address translation has to be performed also by software, and translation tables have to be stored on the user area of the disc according to a higher level specification (for instance in the sparing tables of UDF 2.0). This makes DVD-RW not well suited for simple file storage or image burning, as it requires a complete file system to benefit from defect management. Note also that although DVD-RW cannot use +MRW technology (due to technical differences), DVD+RW can very well use UDF 2.0.

 

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

 

Linking

 

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

 

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

 

http://gfx.cdfreaks.com/img/1056305739

 

Even when loss-less linking methods are used, the pits are not perfectly contiguous on the disc, and therefore some PI/PO errors will always occur : to minimize this effect, the location of the linking region is very important. With -RW, the linking region is in user data, and therefore useful bytes will always be corrupted there. Also since the linking occurs after the first sync, the second sync frame (and possibly the third one) will also be lost, since the sync words will not be correctly spaced in the ECC block. With +RW, the linking region is in the last byte of PI correction, which leaves user data bytes untouched. Also the linking position guarantees that all syncs in the next ECC block will be corrected spaced, which gives at least one sync frame less to correct for the player compared to -RW. Note that with +RW, corrections due to the linking region and corrections due to the sync shift are split between two ECC blocks, while they must all be performed by a single ECC block with -RW.

 

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

 

http://gfx.cdfreaks.com/img/1056305777

 

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

 

Multiple recording sessions and compatibility

 

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

 

http://gfx.cdfreaks.com/img/1056305995

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Conclusion

 

During my study of rewritable DVD formats it seemed very clear to me that DVD-R(W) standard was not as well designed as DVD+R(W) (or even DVD-RAM). And although some serious efforts have been put in the latest revisions of the - format to fix some of the original problems (at the cost of a much increased complexity), it still remains technically inferior to +, due to some intrinsic weaknesses (e.g. pre-pits). This is not very surprising, as Sony and Philips have a much longer experience at defining standards than Pioneer (and several key patents), and they also had the advantage to publish their standards after their competitors.

 

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

Acknowledgements

 

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

Disclaimer

 

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

 

Michael Spath - spath@cdfreaks.com

[alfa 156]

The DVD format war - Current standings - article

 

Recently the IFA exhibition was held in Berlin, Germany. CD Freaks visited this exhibition with the goal to be informed on the current standing on the DVD recordable market. We were given the opportunity to talk to several people involved in the DVD recordable market and to discuss what we can expect the coming time and what progress has been made.

 

We also visited press conferences of several formats. Currently the DVD recordable market is still divided, there is the DVD-RAM, DVD-RW and the DVD+RW format, all having their own advantages and disadvantages. Expectations are that one of them will become main stream in the end and will be the winner of the DVD recordable race as it is called within the industry.

 

The current promotors:

 

Currently there are three organizations promoting their format:

 

 

 

* RDVDC - The Recordable DVD counsil (DVD-RAM + DVD-RW)

* The DVD+RW alliance (DVD+RW

* The RWPPI (DVD-RW)

 

 

 

All of them had their own booth during the IFA where they demonstrated their latest products and the benefits of their format. Of course DVD+RW and DVD-RW both claimed to be most compatible.

 

Compatibility:

 

 

DVD+RW showed a report from the independent Intellikey Labs, as where DVD-RW claimed their superior compatibility with a test performed by another website (click here for the link and our comments), but still is unclear which format is the most compatible. It however seems to be clear that the difference between the two formats is not substantial and results on these tests are still vague and will likely remain this way because there are many variables involved in testing this and different setting might have different results. The same goes for different recorders, firmwares, players and media.

 

Speed:

 

 

 

The most interesting thing at the moment seems to be the need for speed. As where DVD+R is currently at 8 speed, a spokesman of the RWPPI told us that specifications for DVD-R will probably be released in the autumn (November) of 2003, and the first consumer devices will probably hit the market in spring 2004. At this time it is expected that DVD+R will hit 12 speed. The joint venture of BenQ and Philips seems to work out very well, where Philips is technology provider and developing production lines and moving them to the Taiwanese BenQ, which does the production, as production costs are much cheaper then in Europe. Together they seem to be partly responsible for the progress made by the DVD+RW alliance. The DVD+RW format is not as long on the market as the DVD-RW and seems currently to profit from a technological advantage.

 

 

 

The DVD-R format is, according to a spokesman of the RWPPI, behind due to the DVD-Forum which still has not approved the 8 speed specifications for DVD-R. E.g. Pioneer licenses the technology of this forum and therefore has to wait till the specifications are released.

 

 

 

Besides that, there was also a press conference from the RDVDC, which has as subtitle; “The real DVD”. The RDVDC supports both DVD-RW and DVD-RAM compatible products. Interesting enough the RDVDC announced that DVD-RAM speeds will be increased the coming years. DVD-RAM is currently available at a maximum of 3x in 2004 and this should be raised to 5x, the format should be at 16x in 2005

 

 

 

Where the DVD+RW camp was able to show improvements in their technology, with several 8x DVD+RW recorders and also announcement of support from media manufacturers such as Ricoh, TDK and Verbatim, the DVD-RW camp was able to show us a dummy of a 8x DVD-R media packaging. So, on the part of recording speed there is a clear winner: DVD+RW. For now this format is clearly ahead.

 

Industry support:

 

During the press conference of the DVD+RW alliance also another interesting issue came forward, Panasonic and Toshiba, both manufacturers of DVD-RAM and/or DVD-RW product are now also licensing DVD+RW technology. Rumors are that Toshiba is currently even manufacturing DVD+RW drives for large OEM customers. All with all the DVD+RW alliance showcased an overwhelming amount of information trying to convince us that on their side everything goes very well and we must say, their future looks bright.

 

 

 

The spokesman of the RWPPI confirmed that Toshiba and Panasonic license the DVD+RW technology but also stated that he did not see an end to the DVD format any time near. According to him the demand for DVD-RW will be ongoing. This is also very likely as currently most optical drive manufacturers are producing dual format drives, which support both DVD-RW and DVD+RW.

 

 

 

We can easily say that DVD-RAM is about a forgotten format on the PC, but in consumer electronic devices (VCRs) the format is the biggest in the United States.

 

However, most DVD-RAM recorders will also start to support DVD-RW. According to the RDVDC this is caused due consumer demand. One of the disadvantages of the DVD-RAM is the high price of media, during the press conference the question was raised if the price of media would go down, the answer was very unclear and we expect that this will remain a disadvantage of DVD-RAM and hence the support for DVD-RW, which will be earlier at higher speeds and is cheaper, but the DVD-RAM format believes that it’s flexible recording technique is still superior over DVD-RW and DVD+RW. The DVD-RAM promoters are marketing the DVD-RAM format as flexible, compatible (with all DVD-RAM compatible devices), fast and durable.

 

To conclude the industry support, both DVD-RW and DVD+RW are widely supported, DVD+RW does have some DVD+RW-only manufacturers and is the format chosen by Dell and HP which will likely make a difference in the future. But at the current moment, there is no real significant advantage. DVD+RW is slightly ahead, and DVD-RAM is clearly behind or even considered dead on the PC platform.

 

 

 

Consumer electronics support:

 

 

In Europe have been many efforts to promote the DVD-RAM format as the solution for stand alone video recorders, but recent developments have not showcased any progress and the format war on the PC remains between DVD+RW and DVD-RW, while on consumer electronics devices the market is more divided. However, also in this market there are some developments. During the IFA about 20 companies showcased video recorders that used the DVD+RW to record, at the same time only 4 brands showcased DVD-RW products, 3 showcased DVD-RAM products and 1 showcased DVD-RW and DVD-RAM combined video recorders. Most DVD+RW devices are based on Philips’ Nexperia, the reference design developed by Philips which makes it easy for DVD recorder producers to integrate DVD+RW support in their devices which has shown its efficiency by reducing the development time till time to market. In this area the winner is also still unclear, DVD+RW is making progress, but still has a lot of work to do, in the United States the market share of DVD-RAM is very large and over there it is the clear winner.

 

Media developments:

 

On the media side also interesting developments are going on. More and more Japanese companies are currently also in joint ventures with Taiwanese companies to reduce the costs. Currently is e.g. Ricoh (Japanese) media manufactured in Riteks (Taiwanese) production facilities, where Ricoh delivers the stamper and production guidelines (technology) and Ritek does manufacturing. This is cost reducing and improves quality as Ritek does high volumes but works according to Ricoh quality.

 

Many media enthusiasts already noticed this, because the ADIP code of these discs remains Ricoh, while they are manufactured in Taiwan. Currently 8x speed media has been announced but is not yet available. Plextor is currently able to write at 8x speed to certain brands of DVD media. A spokesperson from NEC told us that their 8x DVD+R recorder will likely feature the same technology and also confirmed that the current Plextor recorders are no longer build by NEC, like the previous PX-504A.

 

 

 

Conclusion:

 

The DVD format race is ongoing and a lot of progress has been made recently, support for DVD+RW is becoming larger and larger and the DVD-RW camp will need to come with improvements soon to not come behind. While currently DVD-RW is widely supported, the DVD+R(W) might become the first choice for consumers because of its speed and wide availability of devices, which will likely also decrease prices.

 

Update: On Computex there have been more manufacturers announcing speed increases and according to most drive and media manufacturers the DVD+RW format will likely become the dominating format.

[Candlemass]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος ALR ( 6 Ιαν. 2005 , 15:18)

 

Στο πλαίσιο που είχα ρωτήσει την διαφορά από το + και - μου είχαν πεί οτί + είναι για ταινίες και - για δεδομένα.Μάλιστα ρωτούσαν τον κόσμο " Για τι τα θέλετε τα δισκάκια;" Και ανάλογα την απάντηση έδινε + ή - .

 

 

kala, ws gnwston sto plaisio den 3eroun ti tous ginetai...

ta -R einai (mallon htan) katallhlotera gia tainies kai ta +R gia data, epeidh ta +R einai kalytera poiotika kai ta -R einai pio symbata me ta epitrapezia DVD players.

[Gary Kokkin]

http://forum.cdfreaks.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=33

[giannis11]

TDK, Verbatin, Tayo Yuden

Φιλικά

Γιάννης

[porcupine]

Tayo Yuden ( That's) μακραν τα καλυτερα για μενα.Εχω γραψει εκατονταδες.,Εκαψα μεχρι στιγμης 4-5 τα 3 απο αυτα σε διακοπη ρευματος και το ενα επειδη ηταν το 15ο περιπου που εγραφα χωρις να σταματησω :P :D

[blackup]

Με διαφορά για μένα τα καλύτερα που χρησιμοποιώ τα That's (Taiyo Yuden) !!!

 

:happy:

[Dr_Michael]

MAM!

[onefluffycloud]

apo ta parapanw loipon simperenw:

-ta dvd+r einai pio poiotika alla ta dvd-r einai perisotero simvata.

-apo pleyra markas katalhgoume se tdk kai Taiyo Yuden)

*kserete an h kasetemporikh exei Taiyo Yuden ?

[Dr_Michael]

Tayo Yuden και MAM θα βρείτε στην Disk Impex.

H Κασσετεμπορική ισχυρίζεται ότι η ΜΑΜ έκλεισε επειδή αυτοί δεν εμπορεύονται αυτή τη μάρκα! Ελληνάρες επιχειρηματίες!!!

[onefluffycloud]

Disk Impex : pou einai ayto?

[Dr_Michael]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος onefluffycloud ( 7 Ιαν. 2005 , 01:58)

 

Disk Impex : pou einai ayto?

 

 

Αμφιθέα. Σε οποιοδήποτε περιοδικό πληροφορικής θα βρείτε καταχώρηση.

[onefluffycloud]

sorry alla pou einai h amfithea??

[Dr_Michael]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος onefluffycloud ( 7 Ιαν. 2005 , 02:18)

 

sorry alla pou einai h amfithea??

 

 

Φάληρο-Ν.Σμύρνη, 2109404079

[onefluffycloud]

thanks.eisai theos.an kai einai makria gia mena pou eimai kentro..

[minovg]

DVD-R και DVD+R διαφέρουν μεταξύ τους ως προς το φορμάτ απόσο γνωρίζω.

Τα κλύτερα δισκάκια είναι τα TDK. Η 30άδα 17,5 ευρώ από ΚΑΣΣΕΤΕΜΠΟΡΙΚΗ σε στοά της Αιόλου στην Ομόνοια. Οι πιο φτηνές τιμές για άδεια CD/DVD είναι εκεί νομίζω. Μετά έχει και ένα κατάστημα σε μια κάθετη του Πλαισίου στη Στουρνάρη, επίσης πολύ φτηνό. ;)

[George_Kont]

τα PRINCO τα δοκίμασες;

[Dr_Michael]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος George_Kont ( 7 Ιαν. 2005 , 09:00)

 

τα PRINCO τα δοκίμασες;

 

 

Να ΜΗΝ τα δοκιμάσει καλύτερα.

[KostasV]

Με ολα αυτα τα δισκακια που αναφερετε, τι ταχυτητες εγγραφης πιανετε?

[minovg]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος George_Kont ( 7 Ιαν. 2005 , 09:00)

 

τα PRINCO τα δοκίμασες;

 

Μακριά!! :down:

Ίσως η πιο άχρηστη μάρκα που υπάρχει σε DVD-R... :whistle:

[minovg]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος KostasV ( 7 Ιαν. 2005 , 11:45)

 

Με ολα αυτα τα δισκακια που αναφερετε, τι ταχυτητες εγγραφης πιανετε?

 

4απλής άντε και 8πλής εγγραφής (σε 14 λεπτά αντιγράφει)... Τα 16πλής δεν κυκλοφορούν ακόμα ή είναι πολύ ακριβά... Κάτι σαν τα dual layer... :whistle:

[alfa 156]

Αρχικό Μήνυμα από το μέλος minovg ( 7 Ιαν. 2005 , 12:23)

 

Μακριά!! :down:

Ίσως η πιο άχρηστη μάρκα που υπάρχει σε DVD-R... :whistle:

 

 

γιατι σε cd? απορώ γιατί εξακολουθεί και υπάρχει αυτή η εταιρία...