I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am not
going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask will we
eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I do not
want to buy another until they are maxed out.
Joe
"Joe" <nospam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jyl_e.11228$eB3.7465@bignews3.bellsouth.net.. .
>I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am not
>going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask will
>we eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I do not
>want to buy another until they are maxed out.
If you always waited for the next best thing around the corner you'd still
own a 386 (if you even ever bought a PC).
If you NEED a faster drive, get one. If you don't NEED it, but WANT it and
can justify spending the money, get one. If you just like bigger numbers,
wait for blueray or whatever they call it.
I just don't want to waste money. When I bought my first CD burner I paid
$320 for a 4X and less than a year later got a 16X for $120 and these days a
52X can be had for $20. I just do not want to spend the money to buy a 16X
when the 8X is getting the job done. However if 16X is going to be as good
as it gets then I will go ahead and buy a 16X but if a 32X will be out in 6
months I will wait.
Joe
"Noozer" <dont.spam@me.here> wrote in message
news:d%l_e.3791$tl2.2282@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Joe" <nospam@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:jyl_e.11228$eB3.7465@bignews3.bellsouth.net.. .
>>I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am
>>not going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask
>>will we eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I
>>do not want to buy another until they are maxed out.
>
> If you always waited for the next best thing around the corner you'd still
> own a 386 (if you even ever bought a PC).
>
> If you NEED a faster drive, get one. If you don't NEED it, but WANT it and
> can justify spending the money, get one. If you just like bigger numbers,
> wait for blueray or whatever they call it.
>
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 20:51:34 -0500, "Joe"
<nospam@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I just don't want to waste money. When I bought my first CD burner I paid
>$320 for a 4X and less than a year later got a 16X for $120 and these days a
>52X can be had for $20.
This is mainly evidence that your being an early adoptor,
costs more. That is not a reason to not buy a drive now
with them priced reasonably at around $45, IF you chose to.
The larger issue would be media- that good media for highest
speeds will be harder to find, rather than just buying
fastest possible at reasonable prices then burning at the
mature rate everyone else has- and then you can also use
feedback from more users as to which media works well, and
works well with any particular burner.
>I just do not want to spend the money to buy a 16X
>when the 8X is getting the job done.
Then don't- problem solved.
>However if 16X is going to be as good
>as it gets
No such thing- even if it were, "as good as it gets" would
mean a mature design that has had some firmware updates too.
If you early-adopt the first 32X drive that would come
along, you are paying premium to be a beta tester, and again
pay premium for media.
>then I will go ahead and buy a 16X but if a 32X will be out in 6
>months I will wait.
Why would you expect a jump from 16 to 32X? More likely
it'd be 16 to 24X. Will it happen in 6 months? How much
would you pay and were will you be (in the world), 6 months
from now? If 6 months is the window, go ahead and get a
16X drive.
"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:2e4kj15beth3bh6cnntp369mg5s8dp15u3@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 20:51:34 -0500, "Joe"
> <nospam@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>I just don't want to waste money. When I bought my first CD burner I paid
>>$320 for a 4X and less than a year later got a 16X for $120 and these days
>>a
>>52X can be had for $20.
>
> This is mainly evidence that your being an early adoptor,
> costs more. That is not a reason to not buy a drive now
> with them priced reasonably at around $45, IF you chose to.
> The larger issue would be media- that good media for highest
> speeds will be harder to find, rather than just buying
> fastest possible at reasonable prices then burning at the
> mature rate everyone else has- and then you can also use
> feedback from more users as to which media works well, and
> works well with any particular burner.
>
>>I just do not want to spend the money to buy a 16X
>>when the 8X is getting the job done.
>
> Then don't- problem solved.
>
>>However if 16X is going to be as good
>>as it gets
>
> No such thing- even if it were, "as good as it gets" would
> mean a mature design that has had some firmware updates too.
> If you early-adopt the first 32X drive that would come
> along, you are paying premium to be a beta tester, and again
> pay premium for media.
>
>
>>then I will go ahead and buy a 16X but if a 32X will be out in 6
>>months I will wait.
>
> Why would you expect a jump from 16 to 32X? More likely
> it'd be 16 to 24X. Will it happen in 6 months? How much
> would you pay and were will you be (in the world), 6 months
> from now? If 6 months is the window, go ahead and get a
> 16X drive.
Isn't there a physical limit to how fast a DVD can actually be spun?
I'm sure i read somewhere(!) that 16X was about as fast as a DVD can be spun
without creating problems - the DVD may even fragment at higher than 16X....
Feel free to correct me if i'm wrong of course.
Martin.
:-)
PS I just had a quick Google and it seems like i'm right!
"The maximum speed looks to be 16x," said Anthony Jasionowski, group
manager of strategic planning at Panasonic and spokesman for the Ram
Promotion Group.
"Any faster and even the best media might break apart. It's revolving at
11,000 rpm. We think our competitors may top out at 12x."
So you may as well get a 16X DVD writer now Joe - unless you want to wait
for them to get any cheaper.
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:36:22 -0500, "Joe" <nospam@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am not
>going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask will we
>eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I do not
>want to buy another until they are maxed out.
Are you taking Riplock into account? Riplock limits the speed of
reading a video DVD to about 4x. If you are talking about write speed,
then you have to make sure the media you use is listed in the
firmware, at the level of the MID.
Joe wrote:
> I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I
> am not going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So
> I ask will we eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be
> the limit? I do not want to buy another until they are maxed out.
> Joe
In terms of rotational speed, 16x for DVD is as fast as a DVD can be spun.
Someone may come up with a modified way of writing data to the DVD or
perhaps we'll start seeing "Blu-Ray" soon.
Joe wrote:
> I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am not
> going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask will we
> eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I do not
> want to buy another until they are maxed out.
> Joe
Wait.. doesn't 16X for a DVD means about 22,160 kB/s?? since most hard
drives can read at about like 40-50 MB/s, i'd be surprised to ever see
a 52X DVD burner
You seem to imagine that X's are the same for CD's as DVD's, but they
are not at all. For CD's, correct me if i'm wrong, I think a X is 150
kB/s. For DVD, it's 1385 kB/s, in other words, 1X for a DVD equals over
9X for a CD, so 16X for a DVD is the equivalent of about 148X for a CD
52X for a DVD would be 70 MB/s, since it's way faster than mostly
anybody's hard drive read speed, you want see that kinda thing before a
long long long time.
So yeah really, go for a 16X burner, I got one myself, and it's all good
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:36:22 -0500, "Joe" <nospam@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
>I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am not
>going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask will we
>eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I do not
>want to buy another until they are maxed out.
>Joe
>
16x is it. 16x DVD isn't the same as 16x for a CD in terms of
rotational speed. 16x DVD rotational speeds are about as fast as
anyone dares to go without risking the discs flying apart.
That doesn't mean that newer drives won't continue to come out every
six months though. DVD SL burn speeds have maxed out, but there's
still some ways to go before the RW and DL burn speeds are maxed, and
they'll continue to add new features and probably new formats as they
get finalized.
To answer the real question you seem to be implying, NO, you have not
seen the end of optical drive obsolescence.
---------------------------------------------
Thanks.
On 28 Sep 2005 15:50:22 -0700, "CFran" <Michel0528@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>go for a 16X burner, I got one myself, and it's all good
Burn at 8x until you can convince yourself the combination of burner
and media will burn properly at 16x. Personally I would not trust any
media to burn at 16x unless the burner was an NEC 3540 and the media
was TY or Verbatim.
Thanks
This is what I was getting at but I guess I misworded my question. If I
understand you correctly, due to the same type of limitations that capped CD
burning at 52X DVD has been capped at 16X.
Joe
"MCheu" <mpcheu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uohmj1p6qrtk31p53voq9mqkfn82pduuic@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:36:22 -0500, "Joe" <nospam@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
>>I bought a 2X burner then an 8X. I want to go as fast as I can but I am
>>not
>>going to buy a 16X if 32X is going to be out in six months. So I ask will
>>we
>>eventually see 52X DVD burners or is 16X going to be the limit? I do not
>>want to buy another until they are maxed out.
>>Joe
>>
>
> 16x is it. 16x DVD isn't the same as 16x for a CD in terms of
> rotational speed. 16x DVD rotational speeds are about as fast as
> anyone dares to go without risking the discs flying apart.
>
> That doesn't mean that newer drives won't continue to come out every
> six months though. DVD SL burn speeds have maxed out, but there's
> still some ways to go before the RW and DL burn speeds are maxed, and
> they'll continue to add new features and probably new formats as they
> get finalized.
>
> To answer the real question you seem to be implying, NO, you have not
> seen the end of optical drive obsolescence.
> ---------------------------------------------
> Thanks.
>
>
> MCheu
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:57:26 -0500, "Joe"
<nospam@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Thanks
> This is what I was getting at but I guess I misworded my question. If I
>understand you correctly, due to the same type of limitations that capped CD
>burning at 52X DVD has been capped at 16X.
>Joe
That's the theory, but using more robust spindle motor or
optical disc medium might be possible, probably is though
allowances might need be made for this (medium change) when
burning.
I've got a Plextor PX-740A and Verbatim DVD-R's, so yeah, I can burn at
16X confidently, and I never had any problem with burning at such a
speed
Bob wrote:
> On 28 Sep 2005 15:50:22 -0700, "CFran" <Michel0528@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>
> >go for a 16X burner, I got one myself, and it's all good
>
> Burn at 8x until you can convince yourself the combination of burner
> and media will burn properly at 16x. Personally I would not trust any
> media to burn at 16x unless the burner was an NEC 3540 and the media
> was TY or Verbatim.
>
>
> --
>
> Greatest Movie Line Ever
> http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/MovieLine.wmv
>
> "What is history but the story of how politicians have
> squandered the blood and treasure of the human race?"
> --Thomas Sowell
DVD burners is 16X it? 
Linear Mode
