A Computer hardware and components forum. ComputerBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ComputerBanter.com forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Cdr
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Do I want 32X CDRW media?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 12th 03, 04:13 AM
mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

I bought a liteON 52/32/52 drive.
I can't find any (locally) RW media faster than 24X.
In researching, it appears that the 32x media is
fundamentally different from 24x and down. And it
seems that the 32x stuff is largely untested in the
real world.

Is the 24x stuff any better in terms of reliability?

I hate to stock up on 24x stuff if the 32x stuff is just
around the corner. On the other hand, it seems like
the CDRW stuff is quickly disappearing in favor of DVDRW.
Too bad DVDRW won't play in my mp3 player.

Suggestions?
mike


--
Bunch of stuff For Sale and Wanted at the link below.
laptops and parts Test Equipment
Honda CB-125S
Color LCD overhead projector
Tek 2465 $800, ham radio, 30pS pulser
Tektronix Concept Books, spot welding head...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/4710/

  #2  
Old November 12th 03, 08:31 AM
smh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com
(Messages 10, 12 -- 34, 54 -- 69)

( No pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a libel )
( -- despite Mikey's supposed to have examples of misquotes! )


Mike Richter (Lying Scum) wrote:

Reliability of any erasable is dubious


*ANY* rewritable, Mikey?

- as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


Solely based on the Mikey's say-so, Mikey?

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.


Is 2x-only rewritable NOT ANY rewritable, Mikey?

Also, were you excluding 2x-only rewritable here? Were you not
condemning ALL rewritables, Mikey?

=====================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug?
Date: 10/15/01

Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of
erasables (particularly HS) to forget is lethal for archiving.
=====================

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
  #3  
Old November 12th 03, 08:31 AM
smh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com
(Messages 10, 12 -- 34, 54 -- 69)

( No pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a libel )
( -- despite Mikey's supposed to have examples of misquotes! )


Mike Richter (Lying Scum) wrote:

Reliability of any erasable is dubious


*ANY* rewritable, Mikey?

- as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


Solely based on the Mikey's say-so, Mikey?

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.


Is 2x-only rewritable NOT ANY rewritable, Mikey?

Also, were you excluding 2x-only rewritable here? Were you not
condemning ALL rewritables, Mikey?

=====================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug?
Date: 10/15/01

Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of
erasables (particularly HS) to forget is lethal for archiving.
=====================

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
  #4  
Old November 12th 03, 08:31 AM
smh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com
(Messages 10, 12 -- 34, 54 -- 69)

( No pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a libel )
( -- despite Mikey's supposed to have examples of misquotes! )


Mike Richter (Lying Scum) wrote:

Reliability of any erasable is dubious


*ANY* rewritable, Mikey?

- as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


Solely based on the Mikey's say-so, Mikey?

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.


Is 2x-only rewritable NOT ANY rewritable, Mikey?

Also, were you excluding 2x-only rewritable here? Were you not
condemning ALL rewritables, Mikey?

=====================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug?
Date: 10/15/01

Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of
erasables (particularly HS) to forget is lethal for archiving.
=====================

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
  #5  
Old November 12th 03, 08:33 AM
smh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com
(Messages 10, 12 -- 34, 54 -- 69)

( No pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a libel )
( -- despite Mikey's supposed to have examples of misquotes! )


Mike Richter (Lying Scum) wrote:

Reliability of any erasable is dubious


*ANY* rewritable, Mikey?

- as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


Solely based on the Mikey's say-so, Mikey?

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.


(Is 2x-only rewritable NOT ANY rewritable, Mikey?)

Found 2x cd-rw were reliable, Mikey? Guess that justifies this:

=====================
From: Mike Richter (Acraptec Shill)
Subject: A note on Take Two
Date: 9/1/99

You may back up...to a DCD-formatted erasable.
=====================

Wait a minute here. That weasels away only half of this cockamamie
drivel:

=====================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug?
Date: 10/15/01

Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of
erasables (particularly HS) to forget is lethal for archiving.
=====================

What about the flaky UDF fixed-length packets, Mikey? Did the UDF
format undergo a change for the worse between (9/1/99) and (10/15/01),
Mikey?

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
  #6  
Old November 12th 03, 08:33 AM
smh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com
(Messages 10, 12 -- 34, 54 -- 69)

( No pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a libel )
( -- despite Mikey's supposed to have examples of misquotes! )


Mike Richter (Lying Scum) wrote:

Reliability of any erasable is dubious


*ANY* rewritable, Mikey?

- as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


Solely based on the Mikey's say-so, Mikey?

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.


(Is 2x-only rewritable NOT ANY rewritable, Mikey?)

Found 2x cd-rw were reliable, Mikey? Guess that justifies this:

=====================
From: Mike Richter (Acraptec Shill)
Subject: A note on Take Two
Date: 9/1/99

You may back up...to a DCD-formatted erasable.
=====================

Wait a minute here. That weasels away only half of this cockamamie
drivel:

=====================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug?
Date: 10/15/01

Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of
erasables (particularly HS) to forget is lethal for archiving.
=====================

What about the flaky UDF fixed-length packets, Mikey? Did the UDF
format undergo a change for the worse between (9/1/99) and (10/15/01),
Mikey?

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
  #7  
Old November 12th 03, 08:33 AM
smh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...mindspring.com
(Messages 10, 12 -- 34, 54 -- 69)

( No pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a libel )
( -- despite Mikey's supposed to have examples of misquotes! )


Mike Richter (Lying Scum) wrote:

Reliability of any erasable is dubious


*ANY* rewritable, Mikey?

- as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


Solely based on the Mikey's say-so, Mikey?

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.


(Is 2x-only rewritable NOT ANY rewritable, Mikey?)

Found 2x cd-rw were reliable, Mikey? Guess that justifies this:

=====================
From: Mike Richter (Acraptec Shill)
Subject: A note on Take Two
Date: 9/1/99

You may back up...to a DCD-formatted erasable.
=====================

Wait a minute here. That weasels away only half of this cockamamie
drivel:

=====================
From: Mike Richter (cRoxio Shill)
Subject: File Integrity Errors - DirectCD Bug?
Date: 10/15/01

Combining the flaky UDF fixed-length packets with the tendency of
erasables (particularly HS) to forget is lethal for archiving.
=====================

What about the flaky UDF fixed-length packets, Mikey? Did the UDF
format undergo a change for the worse between (9/1/99) and (10/15/01),
Mikey?

--------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
(Mike Richter, any Material Connection w/ Roxio?)
  #8  
Old November 12th 03, 10:20 AM
mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

Mike Richter wrote:
mike wrote:

I bought a liteON 52/32/52 drive.
I can't find any (locally) RW media faster than 24X.
In researching, it appears that the 32x media is
fundamentally different from 24x and down. And it
seems that the 32x stuff is largely untested in the
real world.

Is the 24x stuff any better in terms of reliability?

I hate to stock up on 24x stuff if the 32x stuff is just
around the corner. On the other hand, it seems like
the CDRW stuff is quickly disappearing in favor of DVDRW.
Too bad DVDRW won't play in my mp3 player.



If you want erasable media at all, you will do best with UltraSpeed
since that's what your drive is designed for.


Yeah, but they call the 32x ultraspeed plus. The drive manufacturers
are taking a risk with MY money when they design to prototype media.
Would be nice to have some confirmation that it works in the field.

24x is UltraSpeed (though
you should confirm that with the logo on the package) so it will be
fine. Your information on 24x is incorrect.


Ok, now I'm confused even more.
Here's the quote from the Plextor Website

Why canít I select a 32X recording speed for CD-RW media on the
PlexWriter Premium drive?

You must insert 32X CD-RW media. 32X write performance cannot be
achieved with Normal-Speed (4X), High-Speed (4X, 10X), or Ultra-Speed
(24X) CD-RW media.

And this from Verbatim about ultraspeed+

The latest release of Orange Book Part III Volume 3 Version 1.1 details
the specifications for Ultra Speed + CD-RW media. The discs, which can
only be recorded and erased by 32x drives carrying the Ultra Speed +
CD-RW logo, provide backward read compatibility with legacy multi-read
CD/DVD-ROM drives, 2x-4x drives, 10x-12x, and 16x-24x drives.

I interpreted all that to mean that the 32x media cannot be written at
ANY speed other than 32x and are incompatible with 24x drives.
That's how I came up with the question about "fundamentally different".

Since the media is not generally available to the user community, there
can't be much real world experience. I'm wondering if the same concern
doesn't apply to 24x media.

I surveyed of a dozen local computer stores, discount chain stores etc.
Compusa and Fry's had a few 24x on the shelf. Other computer stores had
10/12x. Wallmart had a few 12x. Everybody else maxed out at 4x.

Reliability of any erasable is dubious - as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


My concern is if the ultraspeed+ are WORSE than highspeed???

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.

Mike




--
Bunch of stuff For Sale and Wanted at the link below.
laptops and parts Test Equipment
Honda CB-125S
Color LCD overhead projector
Tek 2465 $800, ham radio, 30pS pulser
Tektronix Concept Books, spot welding head...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/4710/

  #9  
Old November 12th 03, 10:20 AM
mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

Mike Richter wrote:
mike wrote:

I bought a liteON 52/32/52 drive.
I can't find any (locally) RW media faster than 24X.
In researching, it appears that the 32x media is
fundamentally different from 24x and down. And it
seems that the 32x stuff is largely untested in the
real world.

Is the 24x stuff any better in terms of reliability?

I hate to stock up on 24x stuff if the 32x stuff is just
around the corner. On the other hand, it seems like
the CDRW stuff is quickly disappearing in favor of DVDRW.
Too bad DVDRW won't play in my mp3 player.



If you want erasable media at all, you will do best with UltraSpeed
since that's what your drive is designed for.


Yeah, but they call the 32x ultraspeed plus. The drive manufacturers
are taking a risk with MY money when they design to prototype media.
Would be nice to have some confirmation that it works in the field.

24x is UltraSpeed (though
you should confirm that with the logo on the package) so it will be
fine. Your information on 24x is incorrect.


Ok, now I'm confused even more.
Here's the quote from the Plextor Website

Why canít I select a 32X recording speed for CD-RW media on the
PlexWriter Premium drive?

You must insert 32X CD-RW media. 32X write performance cannot be
achieved with Normal-Speed (4X), High-Speed (4X, 10X), or Ultra-Speed
(24X) CD-RW media.

And this from Verbatim about ultraspeed+

The latest release of Orange Book Part III Volume 3 Version 1.1 details
the specifications for Ultra Speed + CD-RW media. The discs, which can
only be recorded and erased by 32x drives carrying the Ultra Speed +
CD-RW logo, provide backward read compatibility with legacy multi-read
CD/DVD-ROM drives, 2x-4x drives, 10x-12x, and 16x-24x drives.

I interpreted all that to mean that the 32x media cannot be written at
ANY speed other than 32x and are incompatible with 24x drives.
That's how I came up with the question about "fundamentally different".

Since the media is not generally available to the user community, there
can't be much real world experience. I'm wondering if the same concern
doesn't apply to 24x media.

I surveyed of a dozen local computer stores, discount chain stores etc.
Compusa and Fry's had a few 24x on the shelf. Other computer stores had
10/12x. Wallmart had a few 12x. Everybody else maxed out at 4x.

Reliability of any erasable is dubious - as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


My concern is if the ultraspeed+ are WORSE than highspeed???

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.

Mike




--
Bunch of stuff For Sale and Wanted at the link below.
laptops and parts Test Equipment
Honda CB-125S
Color LCD overhead projector
Tek 2465 $800, ham radio, 30pS pulser
Tektronix Concept Books, spot welding head...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/4710/

  #10  
Old November 12th 03, 10:20 AM
mike
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do I want 32X CDRW media?

Mike Richter wrote:
mike wrote:

I bought a liteON 52/32/52 drive.
I can't find any (locally) RW media faster than 24X.
In researching, it appears that the 32x media is
fundamentally different from 24x and down. And it
seems that the 32x stuff is largely untested in the
real world.

Is the 24x stuff any better in terms of reliability?

I hate to stock up on 24x stuff if the 32x stuff is just
around the corner. On the other hand, it seems like
the CDRW stuff is quickly disappearing in favor of DVDRW.
Too bad DVDRW won't play in my mp3 player.



If you want erasable media at all, you will do best with UltraSpeed
since that's what your drive is designed for.


Yeah, but they call the 32x ultraspeed plus. The drive manufacturers
are taking a risk with MY money when they design to prototype media.
Would be nice to have some confirmation that it works in the field.

24x is UltraSpeed (though
you should confirm that with the logo on the package) so it will be
fine. Your information on 24x is incorrect.


Ok, now I'm confused even more.
Here's the quote from the Plextor Website

Why canít I select a 32X recording speed for CD-RW media on the
PlexWriter Premium drive?

You must insert 32X CD-RW media. 32X write performance cannot be
achieved with Normal-Speed (4X), High-Speed (4X, 10X), or Ultra-Speed
(24X) CD-RW media.

And this from Verbatim about ultraspeed+

The latest release of Orange Book Part III Volume 3 Version 1.1 details
the specifications for Ultra Speed + CD-RW media. The discs, which can
only be recorded and erased by 32x drives carrying the Ultra Speed +
CD-RW logo, provide backward read compatibility with legacy multi-read
CD/DVD-ROM drives, 2x-4x drives, 10x-12x, and 16x-24x drives.

I interpreted all that to mean that the 32x media cannot be written at
ANY speed other than 32x and are incompatible with 24x drives.
That's how I came up with the question about "fundamentally different".

Since the media is not generally available to the user community, there
can't be much real world experience. I'm wondering if the same concern
doesn't apply to 24x media.

I surveyed of a dozen local computer stores, discount chain stores etc.
Compusa and Fry's had a few 24x on the shelf. Other computer stores had
10/12x. Wallmart had a few 12x. Everybody else maxed out at 4x.

Reliability of any erasable is dubious - as are fragility and
durability. There is no evidence that UltraSpeed are better than
HighSpeed, which are not as good as the unspecified (1x-4x).


My concern is if the ultraspeed+ are WORSE than highspeed???

The only
erasables which have stood up to repeated erasure and long-term storage
appear to be the original 2x-only blanks.

Mike




--
Bunch of stuff For Sale and Wanted at the link below.
laptops and parts Test Equipment
Honda CB-125S
Color LCD overhead projector
Tek 2465 $800, ham radio, 30pS pulser
Tektronix Concept Books, spot welding head...
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Monitor/4710/

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When Good Discs Go Bad Ablang General 0 June 27th 04 03:47 AM
CDRW not being detected as pri or sec slave... Fredericks General 6 April 18th 04 10:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 ComputerBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.