[Novalug] How to find hardware device access point

[Bryan J. Smith]

From: James Ewing Cottrell 3rd <JECottrell3 at comcast.net>
> Thank God! The LONG version is enough to drive anyone insane!

But it gives the history.  People find my stuff in Google searches.

> I'd just as soon use Flash Drives anyway.

And they have their negatives/limitations as well.

> Still slower than DVD+R, right?

No.  You're thinking DVD+RW v. DVD-RW (or DVD-RAM for that matter).

For DVD-R, CAV can be used, so it's just as fast/slow as DVD+R at the same "speed."
For DVD+RW v. DVD-RW, yes, DVD+RW (CAV) is faster than DVD-RW (CLV).

A lot of DVD+R advocates apply the advantages of DVD+RW over DVD-RW.
But they don't apply to DVD-R.  DVD-R is far more compatible.

Just like DVD-RW should have never come into being (Pioneer marketing),
DVD+R should have never come into being (Sony/Philips "backtrack" on -R).

I'm sorry, but a 40% increase in performance doesn't justify the 5 errors per
disc average, let alone longevity issues.  Again, -RW should have never been
created, but the popularity of DVD+RW first gen drives caused Pioneer to rethink
not creating one (and leaving it to Matshushita-Panasonic DVD-RAM).

The problem with DVD+RW and -RW is that it doesn't solve the error rates that
were quickly identified with CD-RW.  That's what PD-CD did, which evolved into
DVD-RAM -- based on a decade of MO experience by Mat-Pana since the
mid '80s.

> Is that a problem?

Yes, it resulted in numerous lawsuits as Sony/Philips promised firmware upgrades
to DVD-R compatibility.  HP was hit hard not only on the 100i, but the 200i.

Sony/Philip firmware also cannot do character (byte-by-byte) recording for DVD-R
in their 3G drives, which results in not only the most compatible, but the longest
media lifespan.  If I want a backup to last without errors, I write to DVD-R in DaO
(or at least SaO).

> Aren't most of the compatibility issues dead? I mean, how many old readers
> are still out there? These $30 boxes don't last forever.

There are still longevity and other issues, even if compatibility is solved.
In a nutshell, DVD-R will always be more compatible, even with newer players.
Especially as the media wears.

DVD+R looks like DVD+RW, and there are going to be all sorts of issues,
including the initial error rate for that matter.

> Yup! The PLUS format beats the MINUS on speed. And needs to be formatted
> less often.

Yes, for DVD+RW v. DVD-RW.  DVD-RW should have never existed.
But don't confuse DVD+RW v. DVD-RW with DVD+R v. DVD-R.

I don't deny that DVD-RW is not ideal.  But DVD+RW is not ideal versus
DVD-R either, and DVD+R _is_ DVD+RW.

> Who actually USES -RAM?

It has been the optical archiving standard.  -RW was never supposed to exist.
DVD-RAM lasts 30+ years.  I'm currently at 12 years for some discs, 0 errors.  ;)

It wasn't used in the consumer realm nearly as much though.  But it was never
designed for such.  When Sony was still trying to recover from their 3GB, Japan-
only DVD-R+W format, Matsushita-Panasonic had sold 7 figures of video devices
with DVD-RAM.

There are a lot of recording electronics and archiving systems that were DVD-RAM
from 1997-2005.  It was Linux compatible from Day 1, whereas 3rd parties had to
hack Sony/Philips DVD+RW support.  DVD-RAM was huge on Linux storage systems
in the late '90s, where it was the sole option.

Today (2005+) 4.7GB/side isn't enough for DVD-RAM to continue.  But the backward
compatibility is still warranted, and the media longevity still has few equals.  Doing
a software verify after write just isn't the same with DVD+RW.

Ultimately home consumers drove the issue on price, and that's when Pioneer
moved to introduced DVD-RW.  It was a half-baked alternative.  They should have
just left it to DVD-RAM for those that wanted it.

DVD+RW is not a long-term archiving media.  Marketing on performance caused
people to go nuts for it.  Lack of promised DVD-R support led to lawsuits.  HP and
Microsoft, among others, had serious issues with licensing DVD+RW.  I've watched
Sony/Philips off-shoots over the years, and their about "marketing" and are not
very honest on design.

I also still can't stand Sony/Philips for introducing CAV CD-RW (which I call CD+RW)
which caused all sorts of issues when CLV CD-RW was the standard.  Squeezing out
another 40% on the outer tracks isn't worth destroying media -- let alone some CD-ROM
drives could be destroyed by reading them (yes).