Slashdot Mirror
Plextor First With A 12x DVD+R Drive
Tesko writes "It seems the first 12x DVD+R drive has been released by none other than Plextor, with their Model PX-712A (Product link here). The drive's write speed includes, 48X CD-R, 24X CD-RW, 12X DVD+R, 8X DVD-R, 4X DVD+RW, 4X DVD-RW. And it's read speed comes in at 48X CD-ROM/CD-R, and 16X DVD-ROM. Also noteworthy, the drive apparently has a 8MB buffer."
That definately will decrease backup time, I mean with dual layer coming out, and if the speeds keep increasing for drives, this could become a viable realtime backup solution, especially using a disc changer. Im not saying it will be blazing, but for smaller companies, it could definately help cut costs. Just seems very cool.
je suis parce que j'aime
Knowing the data-rates that can be involved with DVDs I would have thought that 8Mb is only maybe a seconds worth of 'incident' time during a write.
As it is, I've already reached a happy medium where I only burn at 12x on my CDR because I know that no matter how shoddy the media I use in the drive is, i've got a 99% chance of a sucessful burn.
I imagine, that if I was to buy a DVD writer I'd end up in the same 'middle-ground' - I don't even know if I can find a use for all this 'speed' when writing sessions are usually relegated to coffee breaks and lunchtimes anyway.
Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
Because black is darker and absorbs more light there are less reflections of the 650nm blue laser which writes the data to the disc. therefor the beam is more exact and the data's more secure.
Blink or no blink. I would buy Plextor in a heartbeat. The only bad thing is that it doesn't come in SCSI, but I'd be more than happy with an external with Firewire. BTW the black minimizes jitter by reducing backscatter. Remember the CD surface is reflective to a certain degree.
There's really 2 standards, + and -.
However:
a) once written, either is usable in any drive
b) All writers these days work with both types
Therefore this issue disappeared about 9 months ago. Try to keep up
" It seems to me that DVD burners this fast would only be used for DVD piracy."
How dumb is this statement?
I have a 250GB HD, and I need to back about 200G of it up.
Each DVD+/-R holds, for the sake of this argument, 5G. That's 40 DVD's to back things up completely. Now then, each DVD at 2.4x takes 1/2 hour, so this is 20 hours to back things up. That means it takes me about 3-4 days since I don't spend every waking hour backing up.
If I can go to a 12 speed drive, then my time drops to a fraction, and I don't have to spend days backing up.
Is this clear now? Will you stop being a fucking shill of the MPAA and imagine other people do things *LEGALLY* that you aren't familiar with?
Seriously.
Not really. Dual Layer is nice, but, from what I've heard, it's slow. A fast 4.7GB single layer DVD burner can be useful to a large number of people who aren't, "It's new therefore I must have it and deride everything else and the people that buy those lesser devices" geeks.
After a quick look at the standards, one can tell that the browsers are not required to support blink
quote w3c.org:n g-props
Text blinks (alternates between visible and invisible). Conforming user agents are not required to support this value. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#lining-striki
looks like its being maintained like this in css3 http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-css3-text-20030514/#t ext-blink
I can go down to my local supermarket and pick up a DVD-R AND a DVD+R in either single of 5-packs. Standard supermarket "people who buy this really have no clue about tech prices" markup applies, but still... I can get one until 12am if I really need to.
I have to agree with my parent though; There's no point buying more space at a lower cost per MB if you're not going to use it.
There are ways to maximize storage, though. Incremental backups on a single CD, until it fills up, for example. I don't personally like that approach since it puts too many eggs in one basket. It also increases the potential for faulty reads on other DVD readers. heck, I still have trouble getting my multi-session CD-R's to read on all of my CD-ROMS!
click-clack, front and back. I'm not moving this car otherwise.
>DVD drives are not yet as ubiquitous as CD drives.
>For a backup of critical data, I'd want to be able
>to read it at as many places as possible.
Huh?? How on earth did this post get modded "insightful"? I've had a DVD drive in my PC since 1999. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a home PC that *didn't* have a DVD drive. Personally, I haven't seen one in several years now.
Corporate PC's might be another matter, but then, you've got the network and LOTS of PC's to choose from in that environment. I'm sure one of the hundreds of machines at the typical corporate site will have a DVD drive.
And since vanilla DVD-ROM drives can be had for around $30 or so, it's not like they're some exotic technology nobody could afford to add to a machine, in the unlikely event they're somehow stuck with DVD backup discs they can't read because some PC dinosaur doesn't have a DVD-ROM drive.
If you're so worried about being compatible with "as many places as possible", backup to 3.5" floppies. They're ubiquitous. At 1.44MB a pop though, be prepared to deal with 1,000+ discs to backup today's average PC hard drive.
Since Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) is supposedly bridgable to SATA, I'm hoping that SAS marks a resurgance in SCSI popularity among home users.
Apart from it not being dual layer capable, so more or less dead in the water, there is also a 712SA version which has a Serial ATA interface. Finally a
computer that does not need parallel ATA is a reality.