Re: question: RW vs. R-only

[Rick Stevens <rstevens vitalstream com>]

Mick Mearns wrote:
> --- raoul s <raoul_s2001 yahoo com> wrote:
>
> > burned CD, one on RW cdrom and one on RD-only.
> > my redhat box could read the RD-only but not the
> > RW one. why?. got it to do with the RD or RW?...??
> > R.
>
>
> Hello;
>    I think it is the CDRW. 
>
> I have tried a lot of brands and have not found even one to be reliable.
>
> I have two systems with CDRW drives but only use cdr disks now.
>
> I gave them away except for one which was kind of dark grey/black, I put a
> clock movement in it!
>
> Its iffy to read them in other drives and they don't erase.

CD-RW is as reliable as CD-R if you don't submit the discs to
temperature extremes.  Your problem lies in older CD ROM drives.  All
CD drives use a laser to read the disk.  In older drives, they used
a 650nm laser (sort of a deep red color), which could read the silver
normal CDs and the gold CD-Rs with no problems.  Throw them one of
the greenish CD-Rs and they'd have a heart attack.  There wasn't
enough laser energy reflected back for them to reliably read the
disks.  They often also used a filter to prevent stray infrared and
UV light from interfering with the read process, further exacerbating
the problem.

Newer drives shouldn't have the problems old drives do.  Again, it's
not the CD-Rs or the CD-RWs, it's the old drive's laser system.
However, to prevent exactly the problem you describe, I tend to use
TDK CD-Rs (which are sort of silver-aqua) since only REALLY OLD drives
have problems with them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, SSE, VitalStream, Inc.      rstevens vitalstream com -
- 949-743-2010 (Voice)                    http://www.vitalstream.com -
-                                                                    -
-             To iterate is human, to recurse, divine.               -
----------------------------------------------------------------------