From: Randal Whittle (rwhittle_at_usa.net)
Date: Thu Jan 07 1999 - 17:10:29 EST
At 04:25 PM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote:
>> From what I understand, its not that the disks are 2x or 4x, it has more
>> to do with the quality of the disks. Lesser-quality disks often have to
>> revert to 2x writing speed. Furthermore, some drives--plain old
>
>Some CD-RW disks are certified for 2x, others are certified
>for 4x. When I pop in a 2x disk, I don't even get the option
>to try to write to it at 4x. That option is greyed out. So
>somehow, the disk is telling the drive not to try writing to
>it faster than 2x.
What software are you using?
Funny thing is, I have cheapo disks I bought at a swap meet (a whole
spindle of 'em--but I did get the gold/gold variety if that really makes a
difference--supposedly that's the highest quality but who knows?).
Now I just use the Adaptec Easy CD-Creator software that came with my
Yamaha drive, but it always reverts to 4x writing speed by default! Since
I bought cheap disks, I don't think its that, and certainly my 2x writing
drive won't actually write at 4x speed (as a matter of fact, the software
forces a test that has to be passed before it will write at 4x--I've never
tried to do it since I know it won't work anyway).
>> I got the Yamaha 2216 (2x write, 2x re-write, 16x reading) instead of the
>> 4416 (4x write and re-write) simply to save the extra $100 I would have
>> paid for the faster drive. I don't regret it, really. 2x isn't going to
>> win any races, but frankly, neither is 4x. Of course it depends on how
>
>I would much rather pay $100 to go from 30 min to 15 min (a
>net savings of 15 minutes), than pay $100 to go from 8x to 16x
>(from 8 min to 4 min, for a net savings of 4 minutes). I have
>a 20x CD-ROM reader right now, and I frankly don't see the
>point in upgrading it to 32x or 40x or whatever the latest
>speed is, because 20x is already plenty fast enough. The
>biggest difference in wait times is at the low speeds.
I quite agree with you and alluded to that in previous posts in this
thread. Personally, I find almost no real-world difference in my TP600's
24X CD drive than the 12x CD drive I have in my desktop. Hence for me, 12x
is all I care to have. I wouldn't pay through the nose to have a 40x CD.
...and its sort of the same thing with the writing speed for me. As I
said, I typically spend 20 or 30 minutes burning a CD (unless I'm only
burning a small one, in which case we're talking 5 or 6 min.). What I'm
getting at is it makes little difference to me whether the computer is
unusable for 10 min. or 20 min. (or 15 vs. 30), unless I were in the
production business where I needed to make 30 CD's or something.
BUT--if I had a 16x writing speed, I'd consider that--because then that 30
min. session becomes 4 min. (and that little 6 min. session less than 1
min.) and that *is* a significant difference. But as it stands, 15 min.
might as well be 30, since I'm not going to sit and watch it anyway.
>> For the amount of file transferring I do, its quite adequate. The number
>> of occasions where I have to transfer a *lot* (and therefore have to wait)
>> are pretty few. Usually its only a 10 MB or so at a time, and almost never
>> more than 30 MB.
>
>Heh heh. Wait until you get a cable modem like I've got. :-)
Sounds to me like you use it to download nudie pictures. ;-)
- Randy Whittle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:54:38 EST