Are 40X CD-RWs worth it?

vbimport

#1

I just posted the article Are 40X CD-RWs worth it?.

One of the things that mostly is mentioned when we post about new high speed CD-RW drives is if they are worth the money for the few less seconds you spend on burning. Businessweek has an article…

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/3848-Are-40X-CD-RWs-worth-it.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/3848-Are-40X-CD-RWs-worth-it.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

6 or 12 seconds? This is really nothing as long as you dont burn 1000discs a day, maybe then it makes a difference but for the standard user??? Why not stopping creating faster CDRW drives, i dont need faster ones. How about working on better quality and lower noise? better buffer underrun technologies or more compatible to different copy protections. This is more important then saving some seconds!


#3

Good point tom909 but don’t forget that, like said in the newspost, along with new drives offering higher write speeds, they always also include new techniques to ensure a high quality back-up. If they (the manufacturers) would for instance bring out a new drive with the same speeds as a previous model but with more/better features would you buy it? I think the most important feature of a drive people first look for are still its supported speeds. I have the TEAC CD-W540E writer here (40x) and I really love it. Not only is it very fast but I have never had a coaster yet due to its quality-ensuring techniques.


#4

3 minutes and 23 seconds = 3.38 minutes = 17.75 discs per hour = 426 discs per 24 hours. 3 minutes and 23+16 seconds = 3.65 minutes = 16.44 discs per hour = 395 discs per 24 hours. Difference per 24 hours = 31 discs. All this with one drive and not taking into account the time needed for changing discs. I don’t think it’s worth it (difference between 32x and 40x).


#5

Please correct me, if I’m wrong.


#6

Only in the sense that nobody copies disks that much, so the statistics are irrelevant. Interesting enough though. When I had a 4x drive I was largely happy with it. I only bought another when they flawlessly copied SD2 at 24x - quite a jump, no?


#7

Its DVD Burning they should be spending more time and dollars developing! IMHO, CD Writing is already more than good enough for most users needs. Maybe they could increase re-writing speeds a bit, but lets face it, most of us CD Freakers hardly even use the re-writing cabablitites of our existing Burners ;), as the CD format isn’t ideal for HDD backup. regards, Br@yza!


#8

They should stop making faster CDRs and work on RWs. If my drive could do RWs faster than 4x (or 8x if you can find the expensive high speed RWs) I would use it a LOT more.


#9

[b]They should stop making faster CDRs and work on RWs. If my drive could do RWs faster than 4x (or 8x if you can find the expensive high speed RWs) I would use it a LOT more.[/] wtf mine does it at 12x


#10

Alright geezerz ! I’ve got a humble pleXwriter 16-10-40 and to be honest, da little suckaz fast enough for me ! At 16x burning for a full 650 CD at about 6m30s and maybe 8m30s with a 10x RW - can’t really complain ! Itz a high quality little sucka too . . (just looks shite !) Da main problem iz da 3 days it takes to download a poxy 650meg CD in da 1st place, here in sunny England ! Laterz … . :4


#11

I am quiet happy with the Plex 12/10/40 and 8/20. BUT If they were to release a Plex SCSI 40 Speed writer, then maybe…Just maybe…:4