You would hope DVD+R is a better format, as they had the benefit of seeing what -R could do. This article is interesting and a start, but the bottom line on what it means to an end user isn’t clear. Not surprisingly, it’s probably not a compelling difference for many. The real issue is which things are relevant to an end user. Those get a little lost in the article, but they include: - Better ECC - Better power calibration info - Better linking - Less space lost in multiple writes The compelling item, defect management, isn’t all that relevant - who would really use RW? RW isn’t a stable medium. Unfortunately starting with the physical aspects (especially pits), no matter how much better you believe it to be, isn’t entirely convincing by itself - it’s only several processing stages later that data gets delivered from a drive. That is, you have to evaluate the net effect on the whole chain (from data to write to read to data). Looking at what happens at the physical level by itself isn’t all that informative, as ECC is there to offset the physical issues.
[edited by buzzy on 23.06.2003 23:39]