Myths....RW vs. RAM?

True or false…
I have heard that DVD-RAM is better for data storage than RW. I don’t really want to use R for the simple reason that I want to be able to change and delete things. Anyways, what I understand is that RW discs begin to de-crystalize almost as soon as you copy data to them. At the same time, I’ve heard that RAM discs do not de-crystalize because of how the disc is made. Is this true?
So that means that, besides a second hard drive, RAM discs are good for backup storage? Also, RWs can only be used so many times (1000?) while RAM discs can be formated like 100,000 times. Again, true?
I have search on Google, but I get mixed results. Thanks!

Using a disc like a floppy or hard drive isn’t really “data storage”. Neither type disc is suitable for “storage”, unless the data is also backed up on another media. For most purposes, RAM is more reliable due to the way it’s formatted. Depending on what your are using it for, multisession writing to -/+R might also be an option. But the best option for re-writability, reliability and flexibility is still a hard drive.

Well i for one found out the hard way before i knew RW sucked for storing i burned alot of semi important stuff on them and less then a year later they no longer woked haha i guess i learned the hard way.

That could have been the breed of discs you used. I bought a “Multi” drive and have been using DVD-RAM discs and we’ll see how it goes.

Completely agree. :iagree:

Sidenote: Despite not intending to use RAM for storage, just incremental backups, I ended up with a lod of stuff spread over 2 DVD-RAM discs for about two years before I fomatted them and started over. During those two years, the discs were rock solid. :slight_smile:

What brand were they, Arachne? :slight_smile:

Panasonic 2-3x ones :)…and that should be “what brand are they”, they’re still going strong :smiley:

Hi :slight_smile:
I think it should be what were they? :stuck_out_tongue:

Don’t get cute :bigsmile:

I want to use some form of RW DVD for Norton Ghost 2003 image backups of my notebook hard drive. I may also used them to make a temporary DVD video now and then.

If all that is said here is true, if people want a RW DVD, why does not everyone use RAM instead of RW?

I checked at Amazon and they have Panasonic DVD-RAM 4.7GB single-sided DVD-RAM discs 10-pack for $18.99 (ASIN: B0002LHSG6).

Is this the way to go?

Thanks much.

You can get Panasonic discs direct from for cheaper, and free shipping after signing up for their ‘club’. I bought a 15 pack in slim jewel cases for $20 shipped from their site, and they also have 25 pack spindles for $30. 3 packs of 5x were around $8 last time I checked, and you could get unrated (2x) discs for $1 each as well.

Regarding your question on why people use RW rather than RAM at times, one reason is that very few standalone DVD Players support RAM, while RW will work in most players. For data I do find RAM to generally be a better format though, but that depends on your needs - for example if you need the data discs to work on almost any DVD-ROM or DVD Burner, RW will have that compatibility while RAM discs will require a drive that supports RAM. And RAM uses write verfication during burning, meaning that a 3x disc actually writes at about 1.4x speed, meaning a full disc takes about 45 minutes to burn. A 5x disc takes about 24-25 minutes for a full disc. ImgBurn now supports burning DVD-RAM with verification off though if you’d like to try your luck there.

THANKS for this info man! I have been thinking about trying out RAM with my 165p6s and after reading this i checked out and ordered a 3 pack of 5x dvd-ram for only 8.61! Again thanks dude :clap:

I ordered from a few weeks ago and got (2) 3-packs of 5X single sided and so far so good with formating and write/reading them with a LH-20A1P. Just drag and drop. Works great.

BTW, remember that you should use Panasonic’s hacked drivers for the best functionality with DVD-RAM media, don’t just use XP’s built-in support.

Oh yeah

BTW, remember that you should use Panasonic’s hacked drivers for the best functionality with DVD-RAM media, don’t just use XP’s built-in support.

I agree, XP can natively write only in FAT32 on DVD-RAM, which I find too slow to be acceptable. Now I use Nero InCD 4.3.x for DVD-RAM and it hasn’t let me down yet. I know some people do not recommend InCD but I wonder what’s the difference if I use some Panasonic or other drivers if they will basically do the same thing as InCD? I used to have issues with InCD in the win98 times - now on XP it has been perfectly stable since I remember.

Use whatever works best for you…

The difference is in the way the drivers interact with the OS, and at what level they do that. The Panasonic driver is rock stable, which cannot be said of InCD. The most common complaint with InCD is discs that refuse to read or write and occasional loss of data. A lot depends on what else you have running, as the InCD driver can conflict with a lot of different things.

IIRC, FAT32 doesn’t support wear leveling either while UDF does :confused:
So the slowth is not the only drawback :slight_smile:

InCD tries to be too much at once and is too buggy :frowning:

There’s also the price difference.