A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » System Manufacturers & Vendors » Dell Computers
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dual layer dvd rw



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 24th 04, 11:24 PM
Sparky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom Scales wrote:

Yes, I said that before you edited it out. Why did you?
"Sparky" wrote in message
...

Tom Scales wrote:

Two layers.


Which means twice as much data per DVD. The single layer DVDs hold 4.7 GB,
the dual layer ones 9.something


Missed it - perhaps because of top posting not intended as a flame, BTW

  #12  
Old November 24th 04, 11:26 PM
Sparky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

LaVacheQuiRit wrote:

The organic entity known as Sparky communicated the following:

Tom Scales wrote:

Two layers.


Which means twice as much data per DVD. The single layer DVDs hold 4.7
GB, the dual layer ones 9.something


I think the correct number is something like 8.5 GB.


You're right, I was guessing. From:

http://www.dvdrw.com/press/duallayer.htm

Philips will demonstrate its new dual-layer DVD recordable technology at
the DVD+RW Alliance booth at the CEATEC* JAPAN 2003 exhibition in
Makuhari (Chiba, Japan) from October 7 to 11. Developed by Philips
Research in cooperation with MKM (Mitsubishi Kagaku Media)/Verbatim, the
technology virtually doubles data storage capacity on DVD recordable
discs from 4.7 Gbyte to 8.5 Gbyte while remaining compatible with
existing DVD Video players and DVD-ROM drives.
  #13  
Old November 25th 04, 12:32 AM
Tom Scales
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes, top posting is so much clearer and more convenient.

Only die-hard people resistant to change have not yet recognized it. Most
seem to be academicly related.


"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Tom Scales wrote:

Yes, I said that before you edited it out. Why did you?
"Sparky" wrote in message
...

Tom Scales wrote:

Two layers.

Which means twice as much data per DVD. The single layer DVDs hold 4.7
GB, the dual layer ones 9.something


Missed it - perhaps because of top posting not intended as a flame, BTW



  #14  
Old November 25th 04, 02:08 AM
Sparky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom Scales wrote:
Yes, top posting is so much clearer and more convenient.

Only die-hard people resistant to change have not yet recognized it. Most
seem to be academicly related.


Now that *does* sound like a flame.
  #15  
Old November 25th 04, 04:10 AM
brane_ded
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

FYI

I installed a Lite-On LDW-451S in my 4550 (a basic 4X) and with the
help at this website:
http://www.cdfreaks.com/

I changed the firmware and made it a SOHW-832S (which is an 8X
dual-layer recorder)

Lite-On is an inexpensive...but very good drive.

Burning DVDs is rewarding...but takes quite a bit of study and
research to fathom.
(compared with burning cds)
  #16  
Old November 25th 04, 12:38 PM
Tom Scales
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sarcasm, sarcasm.

The original poke about top-posting was a flame

s
"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Tom Scales wrote:
Yes, top posting is so much clearer and more convenient.

Only die-hard people resistant to change have not yet recognized it.
Most seem to be academicly related.


Now that *does* sound like a flame.



  #17  
Old November 25th 04, 01:43 PM
Paul Schilter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom,
I agree with you, except the academically part. :-) Nothing more
frustrating than scrolling down a rather long post to read a one line reply.
Top post rules! The exception would be to make a point by point rebuttal to
a long post.
Paul

"Tom Scales" wrote in message
...
Yes, top posting is so much clearer and more convenient.

Only die-hard people resistant to change have not yet recognized it. Most
seem to be academicly related.


"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Tom Scales wrote:

Yes, I said that before you edited it out. Why did you?
"Sparky" wrote in message
...

Tom Scales wrote:

Two layers.

Which means twice as much data per DVD. The single layer DVDs hold 4.7
GB, the dual layer ones 9.something


Missed it - perhaps because of top posting not intended as a flame, BTW





  #18  
Old November 25th 04, 02:39 PM
Tom Scales
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The academic part was tongue-in-cheek since Sparky has an edu domain.



"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast dot net wrote in message
...
Tom,
I agree with you, except the academically part. :-) Nothing more
frustrating than scrolling down a rather long post to read a one line
reply. Top post rules! The exception would be to make a point by point
rebuttal to a long post.
Paul

"Tom Scales" wrote in message
...
Yes, top posting is so much clearer and more convenient.

Only die-hard people resistant to change have not yet recognized it.
Most seem to be academicly related.


"Sparky" wrote in message
...
Tom Scales wrote:

Yes, I said that before you edited it out. Why did you?
"Sparky" wrote in message
...

Tom Scales wrote:

Two layers.

Which means twice as much data per DVD. The single layer DVDs hold 4.7
GB, the dual layer ones 9.something

Missed it - perhaps because of top posting not intended as a flame,
BTW







  #19  
Old November 25th 04, 05:12 PM
LaVacheQuiRit
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The organic entity known as Paul Schilter communicated the following:

Tom,
I agree with you, except the academically part. :-) Nothing more
frustrating than scrolling down a rather long post to read a one line
reply. Top post rules! The exception would be to make a point by point
rebuttal to a long post.


Scrolling? Why not just use the "skip quoted text" button?

--
Hans
  #20  
Old November 25th 04, 05:49 PM
Tom Scales
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Why should I have to click a button to get to the bottom when the right way
to post is top-post?
"LaVacheQuiRit" wrote in message
...
The organic entity known as Paul Schilter communicated the following:

Tom,
I agree with you, except the academically part. :-) Nothing more
frustrating than scrolling down a rather long post to read a one line
reply. Top post rules! The exception would be to make a point by point
rebuttal to a long post.


Scrolling? Why not just use the "skip quoted text" button?

--
Hans



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dual layer, DVD/CD+/-R/W/RAM, pref.external, does it exist yet? MCheu General 4 January 31st 05 01:57 AM
DVD Dual Layer Compatibility and Drives Jim Higgins Cdr 2 January 9th 05 02:34 AM
Dual layer DVD player Martin ©¿©¬ @mandeREMOVETHIS.plus.com Cdr 1 September 6th 04 01:46 PM
Dual Layer DVD-Rs Chris Homebuilt PC's 0 June 2nd 04 06:23 PM
Dual Layer DVD-Rs Daniel P Homebuilt PC's 2 June 2nd 04 09:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.