×2 vs ×2.4 CAV speed? Purpose of ×2.4?


#1

DVD plus models have an ×2.4 writing mode often, instead of ×2.0 for DVD minus.

That’s because the rotation speed of ×2.4CAV would equal ×1.0 at the inner edge.

Why did DVD minus not have ×2.4?


#2

Because DVD+RW-Alliance want to be faster than -R

This speed-war were since both had 16x, +R had 16x as -R had 8x


#3

Because the DVD Alliance’s earliest standard was for 2.4X writing. DVD+R/RW cannot be written to at a speed lower than this.


#4

Sony markets their DVD+RW as ×1-×4.

It is technically possible to write at ×1, but there is no considerable practical need. At least not in CAV.

In CLV, a portable DVD recorder/camcorder could save rotations (battery consumption), but no considerable difference.


#5

They should stop wars.
Work together!
If they just befriended each other, BD and HD-DVD could have survived both.


#6

To late to stop this war

And like in Real World, there´s no winner at all.

The DVD+RW-Alliance was founded because they want to make a cheaper writable DVD-medium with smaller license-fees as the DVD-Forum.

The Alliance need advantages to be a serious competitor DVD-R/W because -R/W already was on the market. One was smaller costs, the was speed. In the time -r highest speed was -R 2x and -RW 1x the Alliance startet with 2,4x, so terminalvelocd is right in this point, there´s no lower speed specified with +R/W. And think about it, if you compare 2x with 2,4x you will see the saved time with 2,4x is higher than 8x compared with 24x (which is hard to reach)

BTW, this was in Germany the 1st consumer DVD-writer

https://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Computer/Computer+Drives/DVR-103+&+DVR-A03#specs


#7

Ah, Pioneer 2003. Well, that name fits.

Our DVD recorder DV-RW250 has a DVR-R07 (=DVR-107/A07 variant for DVD recorders) from 2004.

CD-R/RW/DAE×32read,×24write.
CD-ROM×40read.


#8

I think the 103 was on market on 2001