Re: [Dvdrtools-users] DVD+R/+RW support

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Fri, 2005-03-25 at 08:11 -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Oh, you meant for DVD+R *writers* manufactured 2004 and later.  I thought
> you meant for standalone consumer DVD *players* manufactured 2004 or later.

As I've said to many repeatedly, there is a massive difference between a
media that is a "pie-slice" sectored, like MO, and a media that is
"single-groove", like pressed and WORM.  If you record a MO in
"emulated" WORM, then end-device player _must_ know how to "emulate" it
as a "single-groove."

That's why many CD-ROM drives could read CD-R, but not CD-RW.  Because
CD-R WORM is still physically tracked like CD-ROM, but CD-RW MO is not.

Same deal with DVD players and DVD-R WORM versus DVD-RW and DVD+RW MO,
and the DVD+R "hybrid".

CD-R and DVD-R are "single-groove" WORM.
CD-RW, DVD-RW, DVD+RW are "pie-slice" MO.

DVD+R is some hybrid MO, because Sony/Philips +RW drives couldn't do a
WORM "burn" (not until the dual-format Sony 500 series came out -- but
then DVD+R had already been established).

Matsushita/Panasonic PD-CD and DVD-RAM are improved reliability MO,
adopting a lot of former costly and proprietary approaches, into an
official standard for optical archiving.
It's not for consumer use (although some high-end consumer video devices
used it because it came out 4 years before DVD-RW and DVD+RW), hence why
it isn't advertised much, but it is very much in volume, and will be for
a long time.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith                                  address@hidden 
---------------------------------------------------------------- 
Community software is all about choice, choice of technology.
Unfortunately, too many Linux advocates port over the so-called
"choice" from the commercial software world, brand name marketing.
The result is false assumptions, failure to focus on the real
technical similarities, but loyalty to blind vendor alignments.