Why bother with +/- R Drives?

Cooldraft wrote on 4/12/2004, 9:29 PM
I don 't understand this...I have had nearly 99% of ALL my -r discs work in drives. Far far less percent +r. In fact, I stopped using +r. Why are there no -r drives. I don't want a dual format drive, I have found no use for +r, the compatability was/is horrible. Having a client come back and say that the DVD did not work is unprofessional at best! Am I missing something here?

Comments

PeterWright wrote on 4/13/2004, 4:40 AM
You've been lucky - I recently had three clients who could not play my -R DVDs.

I tried different brands, no change. I finally bought a +/- burner and tried them with +R discs. They all worked.

That's why I bother with +/- R Drives.
tbobpage wrote on 4/13/2004, 6:52 AM
My experience is opposite -- I've never had reason to use -R because I've never had a conflict with the +R discs in any player (dozens tested so far). Go figure...

I have a 4X burner I took out of a Dell machine (?NEC) and use memorex +R media (now the +RW has been bad, but the +R perfect...)

just my .02

todd
richard-courtney wrote on 4/15/2004, 7:28 PM
I too use +R and only burn -R for the very few that wont read.

I burn at the low rate 1x or 2x.
Hunter wrote on 4/16/2004, 10:00 AM
Why +R, well who has money tied up in to +R media and burners and players? One guess, four letters. I have other opinions as to why they now own a NLE based software too.
kameronj wrote on 4/30/2004, 4:58 AM
i'll throw my hat in the ring on this one - I've used +R consistently without any problems. On all my testing machines and everyone I"ve created a disc for, there have been no problems at al.
daryl wrote on 4/30/2004, 7:01 AM
I too have found the +R disks to be more incompatible with other drives, so, I use -R for disks that I may distribute, and use +R for my personal use, like backing up data, I can record to +R at a higher speed than -R so it's quicker to backup. Hopefully the industry will get to the point that some standards are made/improved.
rtbond wrote on 4/30/2004, 10:45 AM
Same here, I'm a +R/RW believer. I have not run into DVD video player compaibility problemswith DVD+R, especially when burning with Book Type = DVD-ROM.

Looking forward to dual layer burners (May 2004 timeframe), DVD+R DL looks to be well ahead (e.g. 6 months) of DVD-R DL folks (i.e., Pioneer).

Rob Bond

My System Info:

  • Vegas Pro 22 Build 194
  • OS: Windows 11.0 Home (64-bit), Version: 10.0.26100 Build 26100
  • Processor: i9-10940X CPU @ 3.30GHz (14 core)
  • Physical memory: 64GB (Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB (2 x 32GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz C16 memory kit)
  • Motherboard Model: MSI x299 Creator (MS-7B96)
  • GPU: EVGA GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER XC ULTRA (Studio Driver Version =  536.40)
  • Storage: Dual Samsung 970 EVO 1TB SSD (boot and Render); WDC WD4004FZWX, 7200 RPM (media)
  • Primary Display: Dell UltraSharp 27, U2723QE, 4K monitor with 98% DCI-P3 and DisplayHDR 400 with Dell Display Manager
  • Secondary Display: LG 32UK550-B, entry-level 4k/HDR-10 level monitor, @95% DCI-P3 coverage
cbrillow wrote on 4/30/2004, 12:03 PM
I also prefer +R/+RW. They burn faster, and, in the case of +RW, they format MUCH more quickly than their -RW counterparts. I have a dual-format burner so that I can make a disc that will play on just about any standalone player.