• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Give me a reason NOT to buy this Lite-on CDRW right now.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< Fair enough.. It's good to see that differences of opinion can still be argued civilly here without falming and name calling..thanks for the well thought out reply Daovonnaex 🙂 >>

You're welcome. And thank you for addressing my gross inaccuracies. I don't like to be wrong, after all.
 


<<

<< Fair enough.. It's good to see that differences of opinion can still be argued civilly here without falming and name calling..thanks for the well thought out reply Daovonnaex 🙂 >>

You're welcome. And thank you for addressing my gross inaccuracies. I don't like to be wrong, after all. >>



This is the first of it's kind. 🙂

No name callings and all. Well said. 🙂
 
"For king of 24x drives, I still believe that Yamaha would win with its P-CAV"



<< I agree 100%. 🙂 >>

It'll be interesting to see their 32x P-CAV drive.
 
It's a good drive, and on of the best for game backups.

The build quality issue worrys me. Dunno about the 32X but people have more complaints --> RMAs on the CDRW boards for the 24X than for other brands. But then again, this may be due to the fact that so many people are buying Lite-Ons these days.

Yeah, the seek times of the Lite-On are about average compared to most drives out there. The Teac is by far the fastest. Does it make a difference to me? Not really. The stuff on these CDs is never fragmented as on HDs, and who runs software off CD-ROMs these days anyway? I think Plextor has it right with 4 MB buffers. Burn-proof is nice, but I still think 2 MB is a bit small and it's always better not to use burn proof. Plus the fact that the 2 MB includes the overhead required by the drive - ie. in real life it's only around 1.4 MB. That said, I haven't had a problem with 2 MB so I may just be talking out of my @ss. 😛
 
I love this soap opera within a thread deal... gives me a warm fuzzy to see all the ATers getting along. 😛

Glad to see a civil disagreement with a solution,

CK
 


<< cause its not in stock >>



I noticed that last night when I went to buy it. Damn.. I should have gotten it when it was in my cart all ready to be shipped out earlier that day. Oh well, I guess I can wait a few more days.
 


<< Burn-proof is nice, but I still think 2 MB is a bit small and it's always better not to use burn proof >>




Why is it better not to use burn-proof?
 


<< Why is it better not to use burn-proof? >>

To make a long story short, it's better not have any errors than have to invoke a form of error correction.

See here. Yamaha's technology is the best in some ways, but burnproof is good. (Note that the article above is a bit old, with latest burnproof technologies reducing the link to under 1 micron.) Also, it's interesting to know that 24X burns on some of our drives sort of use burn-proof on all discs.

So theoretically, if you believe the hype Yamaha should make the best burns. But in real-life this may or may not be the case, since other drives have different features that are good too, like Teac's ability to test the burn quality and adjust laser strength on the fly, not just media quality prior to the burn as with the Yamaha.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top