DVD Burner question!

This forum is for help with and discussion about your video hardware.

DVD Burner question!

Postby DuoEnigma » Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:37 pm

"No one ever achieved victory by sitting back and waiting for it to come to them"

Image
User avatar
DuoEnigma
 
Joined: 03 Nov 2001
Location: New York City!

Postby Kalium » Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:41 pm

A double layer means that there are two layers that data can be written to, I believe. The effect is one of much increased storage, IIRC.
User avatar
Kalium
Sir Bugsalot
 
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Location: Plymouth, Michigan

Postby aznfs » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:27 pm

u can get double the space;; but i not sure how many dual layer discs are even up for sale right now;; let alone for cheap
Image
User avatar
aznfs
 
Joined: 23 Aug 2002
Location: Sleeping in class somewhere in UCR

Postby jbone » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:54 pm

Dual-layer burners are only slightly more expensive than single-layer burners.

The choice is a no-brainer - get a dual-layer burner because the technology is newer and will last you longer.

A single layer holds about 3.85GB, or about 4,500,000 bytes. A dual-layer disc will hold about 7.7GB without the need to flip a disc.

As a comparison, most newer movies are on single-sided, dual-layer discs, so that more information can be stored without flipping the disc - the movie can be better looking with more audio tracks, more extras can be included, etc.
"If someone feels the need to 'express' himself or herself with a huge graphical 'singature' that has nothing to do with anything, that person should reevaluate his or her reasons for needing said form of expression, possibly with the help of a licensed mental health practitioner."
User avatar
jbone
 
Joined: 12 Jan 2002
Location: DC, USA
Status: Single. (Lllladies.)

Postby Scintilla » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:41 pm

jbone wrote:A single layer holds about 3.85GB, or about 4,500,000 bytes. A dual-layer disc will hold about 7.7GB without the need to flip a disc.

Out of curiosity (I don't actually have a DVD burner myself)... if that's the case, then why does everyone advertise <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=4.7GB&btnG=Google+Search">4.7GB</a>-capacity DVDs? And why do they call dual-layer discs "DVD-9s"?
ImageImage
:pizza: :pizza: Image :pizza: :pizza:
User avatar
Scintilla
(for EXTREME)
 
Joined: 31 Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Status: Quo

Postby narcted » Thu Oct 21, 2004 12:01 am

Scintilla wrote:
jbone wrote:A single layer holds about 3.85GB, or about 4,500,000 bytes. A dual-layer disc will hold about 7.7GB without the need to flip a disc.

Out of curiosity (I don't actually have a DVD burner myself)... if that's the case, then why does everyone advertise <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=4.7GB&btnG=Google+Search">4.7GB</a>-capacity DVDs? And why do they call dual-layer discs "DVD-9s"?


In marketing terms, the DVD capacity is 4.7 GB. But, the actual available size is 4.37 GB. This is because "giga" in the real world has two calculation methods. One is 10 to the 9th power, which is 1,000,000,000. And the other is 2 to the 30th power, which is 1,073,741,824. Thus, 4.37 * 1,073,741,824 is nearly equal to 4.7 * 1,000,000,000.

The terms DVD 9 and DVD 5 are just following basic math rules of rounding up. Your rounding up from 8.5 and 4.7, respectively. It's just marketing.
narcted
 
Joined: 03 Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA.

Postby Imaginos » Thu Oct 21, 2004 12:17 am

Also it should be noted that Dual Layer drives can brun single layer DVDs
User avatar
Imaginos
 
Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Location: Andover NJ

Postby Scintilla » Thu Oct 21, 2004 1:16 am

Oh, that whole MB/MiB thing again. That's still more than what JBone said, though, which was why I was wondering. Thanks for clearing that up. :)
ImageImage
:pizza: :pizza: Image :pizza: :pizza:
User avatar
Scintilla
(for EXTREME)
 
Joined: 31 Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Status: Quo

Postby Zero1 » Thu Oct 21, 2004 5:58 am

Dual layer burners are a nice concept an' all, but people seem to have omitted that they are slow as hell.

I believe the current fastest I have seen is 2.4x which I'm guessing equates to 30 mins per disc
User avatar
Zero1
 
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Location: Sheffield, United Kingdom

Postby aznfs » Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:11 pm

yea my dual layer burns @ 2.4x;; single 8x;; of course dvd9s are still expensive
Image
User avatar
aznfs
 
Joined: 23 Aug 2002
Location: Sleeping in class somewhere in UCR

Postby Miz Ducky » Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:37 pm

The last review that I read, stated that there were severe compatibility problems with the dual layer (-r9) format. I was going to wait to get a DL writer until both (+/-) are available, then hopefully the compatibility issues might be worked out.
Have you had any issues reading your -r9 disks in other DVD players?
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
User avatar
Miz Ducky
 
Joined: 23 May 2004
Location: Xanth

Postby aznfs » Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:20 pm

to tell the truth i havent used my dvd9s to burn dvd videos yet;; only data;; but they have no trouble opening up
Image
User avatar
aznfs
 
Joined: 23 Aug 2002
Location: Sleeping in class somewhere in UCR


Return to Video Hardware Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest