digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Next Generation DVD Burners Announced With 18x Write Speed

dailytech.com — Plextor has a new drive with 10X dual layer write speed, 18X DVDR write speed. That's like 3 minutes to burn a normal DVDR.

Who dugg this? Made popular Feb 13, 2006

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

37 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • buck09, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Who cares? What I'm really interested in is DVD+R9 media that doesn't cost a damn fortune.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Each 1x DVD is equivilant to 4x CD"

    A 1x DVD is about a 9x CD
  • acceptab1euname, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2man, ***** dual layer. i bought a DVD burner just for that reason, expecting media prices to go to something reasonable within a year. no soap - blanks are still ridiculously expensive. i'm with bman001, planned obsolescence sucks. When it comes to burnable media, i'll take capacity over speed any day.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Each 1x DVD is equivilant to 4x CD"

    Also, a 1x DVD spins about as fast as a 3x CD
  • dhensleycg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I'll get really excited when they write in real time."
    Wouldn't that be 1x?
  • Yogurth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1is dvd9 still so expensive? I could use the shrinkage of my disc nubers by 50% :)
  • ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Plextors stuff is awesome. I have the 16x SATA Burner and have only burnt one coaster and that was Nero 7's fault.

    Plextor's stuff is definately worth the extra money.
  • danglerman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1By the time this comes out, we'll probably be worrying about HD and Blu-Ray burners, not standard-def.
  • Darkness123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I got a 16x DVD+-RW with 16x Blank DVDs, I still cannot burn faster than 8x
    The DVD+-RW is a LiteOn
    Blank DVDs are Verbatim

    The new 18x means nothing if the Blank DVD can handle it.
  • Jozer99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can't do 32x. Each 1x DVD is equivilant to 4x CD, making DVD 16x about CD 48x. The problem is that at 48x, a CD/DVD is spinning around 10,000 RPM. At that speed, it is hard to keep the disk from exploding, let alone keep it steady enough to read and write on.
  • LoneBannana, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ha! I still have my HP DVD200i ( 2.4X) and that is only because HP gave it to me to update the HP DVD100i that they settled for a lawsuit.

    Just pop a blank DVD in, go watch some TV, then come back.

    I still haven't had the need to upgrade the burner, unless it is for an external drive. Talked myself out of it many times, though.
  • bossm4n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Now if media would be made available. The majority out these only writes at 8x, occassionally 12x.
  • Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1How about a drive that burns at 8x that can be played reliably... I still burn everything at 4x because anything faster, such as 8x on my 16x drive (with quality 16x rated media) just flat out doesnt work.

    there isnt a point in having a 100x burner if you cant even make real use of it.
  • weiran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have some DataWrite 16x discs and a NEC 3500A burner, but I still can't burn faster then 8x, it just coasters :(. We need some reliable 16x media, and cheaper DL media.
  • antdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Heh, I still use a 6X CDRW burner. :) No need for a DVD burner yet.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1they used to say 16x was the physical limit... i guess it is 18x lol
    anyway i would save your money.. there isnt alot of likelyhood. that media will be released for this
  • Baddox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My 16x Verbatim media and NEC burner burn full DVD iso's at 5.5-6 minutes. Not twice as fact as 8x, but it cuts several minutes off, and is worth it to me. What I'm interested in is the 10x dual layer, now if the dual layer media will cost less than retail DVD's :-) .
  • 4850lu73, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I have a dual layer 16x DVD+RW drive and I'm quite happy with it!
  • zbeast, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well that would be a nice toy to add to my hardware stack.
    but right now I'm still burning single layer media.
    Double layer is just too pricey.
  • sykotic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree, I'm happy with burning at 12 or 16x, its not that long of a wait.

    I too would rather see DL media to drop in price, but I only really see this happening when blue-ray and HD burners come out. Until then, I still see these discs remaining at more than $2 a DVD.
  • PacoDG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Im fine with my 16x. I figure the next step up would have been the obvious 32x, or at the least 24x.

    I haven't got into the duel layers yet though, so I guess 10x is good for that.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0slap me and call me silly.. didnt read the entire article.. works on 16x media at 18x speeds
    still would save my money.
  • cyberghost232, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0error, can not compute. 8x fast enough for me.
  • Aux88, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13 minutes! Wow, the 4 minutes I wait now is too long!

    I'll get really excited when they write in real time.
  • Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"What I'm really interested in is DVD+R9 media that doesn't cost a damn fortune."

    Me, too. I burn all of my DVDs at 4x anyway, minimizes coasters.
  • HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This drive is 18x CAV, not 18x CLV. It will be less than 12% faster than CAV 16x burners. Than means over 4 mins to burn.

    Very diminishing returns.
  • kohan69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Uhm, I still burn at 4x, cuz disks burned at 16x, especially video, last 1/6 the time 4x does imho
  • aznboi04k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0DVD IS NOT NEXT GEN! omg... jesus christ. this why digg is not a good news website. OP constantly give crappy title. digg needs a better rating system.
  • Aux88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Wouldn't that be 1x?"

    holy *****! Now I'm excited!
  • feanor512, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>We need some reliable 16x media

    Taiyo Yuden
  • T3rry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0big deal, i have a 16x, but i never use it for 16x, everythign i burn goes to 4x... 4x is the only way to get a deep burn that wont be fubared by a tiny scratch... make the current media more durable before trying to go faster!

    the actual burning time is probably the least in terms of time consumption when making/copying a dvd. Speed up the encoding and stuff first!
  • Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nothing I burn at 8x works when I try to read it after. What the hell is wrong with mah Plextor?
  • ephekt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+018x is "next generation?" My 16x drive is fast enough, I won't be purchasing another drive until I get a Blu-Ray drive.
  • NeilM, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"That's like 3 minutes to burn a normal DVDR."

    That's if it even burns in the first place. No digg becuase I hate DVD burners. Pieces of sh*t.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is why we need holographic media. We're definitely going to run into a huge speed bump once HD-DVD/Blu-Ray comes along.
  • cvrefugee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Discs burned at a higher rate than 4X tend to have more errors...so what's the point of 18X? Is this a conspiracy to sell more blank discs?
  • Darkness123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"The new 18x means nothing if the Blank DVD can handle it."
    That should of said
    "The new 18x means nothing if the Blank DVDs can''t handle it."

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.