Bitsetting on DVD-R?

Is that even possible? And will that even be included to the NEC 2510 soon?

Nope won't happen. I don't believe it is even possible. Never heard of any drive that could do it. So the answer is probably no. Hungry now, talk later. Bye-bye.

Yeah, that was true before Nero 6.3.1.15.

With the newest Nero and HP 520N firmware in my NEC 2500 my DVD-R has been set to DVD-ROM automatically.

Really, could I see a screencap as proof from like dvdinfopro please. Not saying you're lying, but from what I understand of dvd media, dvd-r can't do it. And what program did you use to set the bitsetting, as with previous threads and discussions, nero doesn't do this, but another program must be used.

Interestingly, the Nutech hardware, such as the NU-081 and 082 drives have been able to -R bitset to -ROM for quite some time now.

No !

bitsetting

Hi BoSkin.

So, its not possible eh? Ok. Interesting. So, when we bitset a -R disc as -ROM in a Nutech drive, does this actually break specification per se? Please explain this to me, as I think I have a misinterp. of what the actual act of modifying a -R disc's booktype field means. To me, it meant changing a value to flag -ROM with a very simple command on a programmatic level....but, is this "technically" outside the boundary of the -R format?

I am aware there is a great deal of debate here, but the fact remains, if you bitset with DVDInfoPro to -ROM with a Nu drive, it will indeed have a booktype of DVD-ROM.

Any comments on that would be great, thanks. ^_^

Zebra,

if your memory doesn't fail you, the subject has already been discussed.

Ok, that doesnt explicitly answer my questions...

I will rephrase. What is your opinion on the matter?

Ahead disagrees:
Here's the "what's new" section of 6.3.1.15:

http://www.ahead.de/en/632010493669618.html

It says:
Implementation of DVD-R/-RW booktype changing for several drives

To me it means bitsetting and it seems like bitsetting (Nero Infotool says my DVD-R is a DVD-ROM, so it works one way or other). Of course in strictly technical interpretation it may not be bitsetting but I really don't see the difference.

Just my 2 cents.

Hence my point here...

-R --> DVD-ROM booktype field alteration is a theoretical and practical possibility that is outside the boundaries of the DVD-R standard.

Does this mean it will be ever recognised as a "Real" form of bitsetting? Probably not. Does it increase compatibility in this instance? Thats debatable.

BTW specifications are meant to be extended (80 min CD-R, 90 min CD-R, 99 min CD-R - they wasn't part of the spec. and 90&99 min CD-Rs has no spec. even today, there's no such thing as overburning a DVD, oh, maybe there is , there's no way that you can burn DL discs with SL burner, don't even think about it. )

Yah, DVD overburning is alive and kicking. Works wonderfully with my SOHW-832S and my NEC2500@2510 in the latest Nero.

Incidentally, for all those that don't have some faith

http://www.nu-global.com/1_english/2...p?nID=0&pID=59

<-- Yah, it works wonders. I remember beta testing it, way back when.

Try it...it feels good!

Who has spoken about standards? We were discussing practice, not theories.
Compatibility: AFAIK there are standalones (made by companies of the DVD+RW Alliance) which - accindentally - do not like DVD-Rs. Not common, but they exist.

Sorry, no screenshot cos I'm working now, and the disc is at home - but as you could read in the previous posts, it's nothing mysterious, just a tweak in Nero. Any one can try it with the newest Nero and an adequate burner having "bitset-changing" firmware.

Already discussed on various places. Bitsettings for - doesn't make sense since
the booktype cannot be changed on - discs. The trick discussed here is
explicitly violating the - standard and is in practice not equivalent to bitsettings
on +. Such discs can still be detected as -R discs, and the only reason why
dvdinfopro doesn't show this is that its author is the same guy who is
promoting this trick.

Actually, you can still detect a +R bitset to -ROM, but it doesn't really matter.

It matters all the less that it doesn't contradict what I've said and that it
is not true with booktype only, which is the point of this discussion.

Spath,

While I respect your opinion here....my side of the coin:

The term "bitsetting" was dervied from "setting of some bits" within the structures of the media. Both formats can do this so the term "bit setting" is valid and accurately describes the process taking place. I don't think there is any room for argument there.

This process was done on +R due to the higher percentage of players that failed on the +R disc, due to its different book value, which some older players rejected. Right? Converting this to -ROM allowed most (not all) players to accept the disc and play it.

So, you state the so called "trick" of -R violates the standard but that does not accurately describe it. Replies from Nu, and Pioneer informed us this voilation of the specification is debatable, as the spec does not specifically forbid the altering of the bits.

This was researched and implemented by Nu and others companies as a direct result of feedback from users not able to play -R on some older players and some XBOX's, it was found that the mechanism worked fine in most cases and users were happy.

Users can decide for themselves why a mechanim was already provided for DVD-R whereby the book values could be copied elsewhere, and provided functions to read either the lead in values or susequent values, for if they were *always* expected to be the same there would have been no need for this in my opinion.

Yes, there is, since you are mistaken.
This is valid for only + (plus) format, not both.

BTC and NuTech drives do DVD-R to DVD-Rom

Thanks for the input !

> The term "bitsetting" was dervied from "setting of some bits" within the structures
> of the media. Both formats can do this so the term "bit setting" is valid and
> accurately describes the process taking place. I don't think there is any room
> for argument there.

"Setting of some bits" means nothing, I set some bits when I select "wool" on my
washing machine. The original expression is "compatibility bitsettings" and it
always meant to change the booktype. Otherwise, according to your definition,
people have been "bitsetting" CD-Rs and floppies for years.

> This process was done on +R due to the higher percentage of players that failed
> on the +R disc, due to its different book value, which some older players rejected.
> Right? Converting this to -ROM allowed most (not all) players to accept the disc
> and play it.

Correct. Note that using alternate booktype values to increase compatibility is
specifically allowed in the + standard.

> So, you state the so called "trick" of -R violates the standard but that does
> not accurately describe it. Replies from Nu, and Pioneer informed us this voilation
> of the specification is debatable, as the spec does not specifically forbid the
> altering of the bits.

The paragraph regarding the book type in border zones only reads "same as
described in 3.4.1.4.1" where it describes book type in the lead-in. And there
it reads "These bits shall be set to 0010b, indicating a recordable disc."
I don't see much room for debate here, but anyway we are running again in the
same problem that you are arguing using what others told you on documents you
have not read yourself.

> This was researched and implemented by Nu and others companies as a direct result
> of feedback from users not able to play -R on some older players and some XBOX's,
> it was found that the mechanism worked fine in most cases and users were happy.

Ok.

> Users can decide for themselves why a mechanim was already provided for DVD-R whereby
> the book values could be copied elsewhere, and provided functions to read either
> the lead in values or susequent values, for if they were *always* expected to
> be the same there would have been no need for this in my opinion.

There is no specific function to read the booktype, but only functions to read the
complete 2048 bytes of physical format information, from which booktype is only 4 bits.
Part of these physical format information are the sector addresses of the current
border zone, which will differ between the lead-in and the next border zones.
Therefore two different functions were needed for incremental recording.

Even without this requirement, the physical information copied from the lead-in
to the next border zone also include the linear density, track path, number of
layers etc. Do you think Pioneer did this on purpose to let users overwrite these too ?

OOOOOooooooo Touchy.

Who gives a toss at the end of the day right honest.

If it would make my old Toshiba play DVD-R like it can play DVD+R that are bitset I'm all for it.

btw, my Toshiba doesn't play any DVDR thats not bitset.