DVD+ is superior to DVD-

[aviationwiz]

Here we go. Check this out: http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/113

It proves that DVD+ is superior to DVD-.

[jase]

Yes. The document is fair comment of course.

However, I would argue that if +RW hadn't been technically superior to DVD-R, there would be something severely amiss. The question is, do these technical advancements really matter that much? In terms of +RW, yes, but for +R? Hmmm. Dubious at best.

The format was released a good three years after the original DVD-R format. I still maintain though that +RW was a cynical marketing ploy rather than a genuine attempt at making improvements to an inadequate format. What happens if a third company brings out an even better DVD-compatible format? Are we all to rush to the new one?

One thing that seems to consistently pass the experts by is the simple fact that DVD-RAM is a technically superior format to either of the other two, quite ironic really given that it's the oldest. Forget the fact that it's incompatible with most readers (if the format had been well supported from the start then all DVD players would be RAM compatible by now), the writing system is far more robust and the format itself just better thought through. But it has largely failed. A timely reminder that technical differences do not amount to much -- marketing and hype decide which format succeeds.

[ebenton]

I have no strong opinion on the superiority of DVD + over DVD -. My eyes started to glaze over after the first few paragraphs of the article on CDfreaks.
However, one thing that I would love to see somebody address in a "technical" way are the anecdotal stories about more people's home DVD players being able to play DVD -R than other formats. I have a colleague with a Sony DRU-500A who burns a lot of DVDs of video-captured home movies for people to view on their home DVD players, and he claims that DVD-R has the largest success rate.
I read another posting on some forum somewhere (I don't remember where) where some guys went into Circuit City (or someplace) with a movie recorded on DVD-R and DVD +R and tried them out on all of the DVD players in the store, and the DVD -R discs played on more players than the +R did.
I realize that none of this is scientific, but it sure would be interesting if somebody had the time and/or resources to investigate this.

[Ian]

I don't agree with all of the their comments.. especially the part about defect management.

[Kennyshin]

Michael Spath is one of CDFreaks moderators with the username spath. He moderates Optical Storage Technical Discussions forum at CDFreaks.com Forum.

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php ... adid=71192

[dodecahedron]

a few comments:

1. to my layman's eyes, a well-written article, nice work!

2. jase, i totally agree with what you said.

3.

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.

hmm...yes...all to familiar, spath's condescending attitude, we've seen it before.

[Ian]

hmm...yes...all to familiar, spath's condescending attitude, we've seen it before.

Here we go again...

[Kennyshin]

a few comments:

1. to my layman's eyes, a well-written article, nice work!

2. jase, i totally agree with what you said.

3.

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.

hmm...yes...all to familiar, spath's condescending attitude, we've seen it before.

There are people who have not understood and there are also people who have understood but yet continue to bash DVD+RW standard for various reasons.

[Dartman]

The only reason I use - more is becuase most dvd players can read it so that makes it better for movies whether it really is technicly better or not.
All the + media I have does at least 2.4 and works very well for backups and like that. Also I think the - media is a bit cheaper right now.
I do get a feeling that they just weren't happy with everyone using one standard so they had to muddy things up to try and get some market share.

[Kennyshin]

The only reason I use - more is becuase most dvd players can read it so that makes it better for movies whether it really is technicly better or not.
All the + media I have does at least 2.4 and works very well for backups and like that. Also I think the - media is a bit cheaper right now.
I do get a feeling that they just weren't happy with everyone using one standard so they had to muddy things up to try and get some market share.

DVD-R media are a little cheaper than DVD+R media because Princo, Infodisc, Nanya, CMC, Prodisc, Gigastorage, Beall, SKC, and some other East Asian optical storage media manufacturers have made them for a long time while very few of them have really made DVD+R media. The decisive factor is the media availability to end users. Beall, SKC, Taiyo Yuden, Mitsubishi, CMC, Prodisc, Ritek, Ricoh, and some other companies have either been making or tried to make DVD+R media recently.

[ebenton]

Maybe the fact that DVD-R media have been manufactured for a longer period of time than +R media would account for many of the reports that DVD-R discs play better in more home DVD players. Perhaps the length of time that both inexpensive and expensive DVD-R disks have been manufactured by a wider variety of manufacturers makes it more likely that any given disk will be of acceptable quality, so that it will play in a wider variety of home DVD players?
Or maybe since the -R disks have been around longer, there are more people out there who have used them in more different players, and have generated more reports of successful play of DVD-R in home players.

[dodecahedron]

a few comments:

1. to my layman's eyes, a well-written article, nice work!

2. jase, i totally agree with what you said.

3.

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.

hmm...yes...all to familiar, spath's condescending attitude, we've seen it before.

There are people who have not understood and there are also people who have understood but yet continue to bash DVD+RW standard for various reasons.

you can make any comment you wish, but why quote me if your comment has nothing to do with what i wrote???

i did not claim to understand everything in that review, and as i used the word "layman" to describe myself, it think it's clear i did not claim to have understood everthing.
so if it needs to be spelled out more clearly, here:
i am no expert in technical matters of optical storage, and freely admit that i did not understand all the technical aspects of the essay.
seeing that my knowledge is limited, i cannot evaluate how technically accurate Spath's paper is, how impartial it is and how correct his conclusions are. i believe him when he says he has his reasons for drawing his conclusions. to a certain degree he has convinced me and i agree with them, but i remain cautiously skeptical (as i am in any matter i do not comfortably feel i understand well enough).

i did not "bash" the DVD+RW standard, nor did i make any judgement on either standard. so your comment, relating to my quote, is irrelevant.

the opinions i made, about the quality/style of the article, and about spath's attitude, aren't related to DVD+RW standard and do not require technical expertise.

[Kennyshin]

a few comments:

1. to my layman's eyes, a well-written article, nice work!

2. jase, i totally agree with what you said.

3.

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.

hmm...yes...all to familiar, spath's condescending attitude, we've seen it before.

There are people who have not understood and there are also people who have understood but yet continue to bash DVD+RW standard for various reasons.

you can make any comment you wish, but why quote me if your comment has nothing to do with what i wrote???

i did not claim to understand everything in that review, and as i used the word "layman" to describe myself, it think it's clear i did not claim to have understood everthing.
so if it needs to be spelled out more clearly, here:
i am no expert in technical matters of optical storage, and freely admit that i did not understand all the technical aspects of the essay.
seeing that my knowledge is limited, i cannot evaluate how technically accurate Spath's paper is, how impartial it is and how correct his conclusions are. i believe him when he says he has his reasons for drawing his conclusions. to a certain degree he has convinced me and i agree with them, but i remain cautiously skeptical (as i am in any matter i do not comfortably feel i understand well enough).

i did not "bash" the DVD+RW standard, nor did i make any judgement on either standard. so your comment, relating to my quote, is irrelevant.

the opinions i made, about the quality/style of the article, and about spath's attitude, aren't related to DVD+RW standard and do not require technical expertise.

I was not talking about your attitude nor M. Spath's attitude. Do I have to name those people here?

[dodecahedron]

OK, i think i may have overreacted (someone hinted that i did! )
sorry!
no hard feelings i hope

cheers
dodecahedron

[jase]

No. He is referring to me, in reference to my tirade against a certain website a couple of months back. I find it interesting though that Kennyshin should quote you instead of me.

I don't understand why people have to pussyfoot around. Call a spade a shovel (to misquote a famous Yorkshireman), for pity's sake!!!

[dodecahedron]

peace

[nealh]

I am so confused..I have read that + media is read better by dvd players...but then I read - media is better...crap...so what is true...

I was all ready to get the cendyne 4x +R/RW..I do not want to pay for a dual format just too expensive

help

[Dartman]

Most of the older players can play -r and maybe -rw, they usually can't do + media. It's too new or whatever for the older gear. That's why if I couldn't afford dual I'd get a - burner and be done with it. Like I said that doesn't mean it's better, just way more playable by most dvd machines people happen to own.

[lgmayka]

My understanding also, from wide-ranging surveys, is that DVD-R is more compatible with the existing DVD players in people's homes, as well as the inexpensive players that ordinary people are likely to buy. My understanding is that the few studies that favor DVD+R are foolishly weighted toward brand-new, brand-name DVD players. Needless to say, I cannot expect my relatives and friends to buy an expensive new DVD player just to play my movies.

[nealh]

thanks..I understand now..so how new does a dvd player need to be to play + media

[Inertia]

Most of the older players can play -r and maybe -rw, they usually can't do + media. It's too new or whatever for the older gear. That's why if I couldn't afford dual I'd get a - burner and be done with it. Like I said that doesn't mean it's better, just way more playable by most dvd machines people happen to own.

My understanding also, from wide-ranging surveys, is that DVD-R is more compatible with the existing DVD players in people's homes, as well as the inexpensive players that ordinary people are likely to buy. My understanding is that the few studies that favor DVD+R are foolishly weighted toward brand-new, brand-name DVD players. Needless to say, I cannot expect my relatives and friends to buy an expensive new DVD player just to play my movies.

thanks..I understand now..so how new does a dvd player need to be to play + media

I bought my Apex AD 600A three years ago, and it was around for nine months or so before I bought it. Based on the information above, if I blindly took these these opinions to be a guide I would buy a DVD-R burner.

Unfortunately, in the case of this older DVD player, the truth is exactly the opposite of the views presented above. Videoxb DVD-R Compatibility Chart indicates that the older Apex AD 600A is NOT compatible with DVD-R recordings.

DVDplusRW.org Compatibility List DVD-Video Players indicates the Apex AD 600A IS compatible with DVD+R recordings, and will play DVD+RW with a compatibility setting adjustment.

I point this out for general observation since this is the opposite experience of the views expressed above. Anyone considering buying a DVD burner that is concerned with compatibility issues should not make decisions based on hearsay, but should check the DVD players to be used against the DVD-R and DVD+R compatibility lists to verify that they will work with the chosen format.

[dolphinius_rex]

Inertia:

With a little bit of research I found that your Apex 600 is MUCH more likely to play DVD-Rs then it is to play DVD+Rs, however it can play BOTH formats with a simple firmware upgrade

http://www.dvdrhelp.com/dvdplayers.php? ... &#comments

[Inertia]

Inertia:

With a little bit of research I found that your Apex 600 is MUCH more likely to play DVD-Rs then it is to play DVD+Rs, however it can play BOTH formats with a simple firmware upgrade

http://www.dvdrhelp.com/dvdplayers.php? ... &#comments

Thanks, dolphinius_rex

I read the information in the link that you supplied, and came to a different conclusion. Practically all users could not play DVD-R unless they changed the firmware. Most that did this did not even try DVD+R, probably because it wasn't available. Practically all of the users that tried DVD+R were able to play it without changing firmware.

As always, changing firmware is not for the fainthearted. This is a trickier firmware upgrade than most, and some experienced drive failure as a result of attempting the firmware change.

Nevertheless, this is a great link and resource in case I ever buy a DVD burner. Thanks again.

[dolphinius_rex]

DVDRhelp.com is the first place I go for looking up info like that. Everytime I find out a friend has a DVD player I always check it out on there to see what people are saying about it.

I'm glad you like it too!

[Kennyshin]

No. He is referring to me, in reference to my tirade against a certain website a couple of months back. I find it interesting though that Kennyshin should quote you instead of me.

I don't understand why people have to pussyfoot around. Call a spade a shovel (to misquote a famous Yorkshireman), for pity's sake!!!

You sound a bit too sure. You are just one person while I said people. At least, you did not threaten me by trying to make my life impossible in South Korea.

You do not belong to the category of "people who have understood but yet continue to bash..." since you posted not that many times on this as far as I've seen.

I meant some members and non-members at DVDRHelp.com and DVDPlusRW.org.