Pioneer ships its 5 millionth DVD writer

I usually don't support any big companies, but my dvr-105 is excellent!

I agree, i don`t support a company just because of the name they have, its because of the product they produce and my AO5 is excellent

I thought the currently available A06 was also a dual-format recorder supporting both DVD-R and DVD+R?

BobL: Ah, yes, you're correct, I fixed the article now.

Second part of the article is more important: "DVD-R has gathered 54.9 percent of this years blank media sales ". Lets hope that the double format thing stops. Noone needs it except of some companies.

Well, all I can say is that I see little advantage (well, none actually) in having two disc formats anyway. I wouldn't want to pay a premium for a dual-format burner (Pioneer or otherwise), because I see no advantages to using +R/+RW media. Do any of you? I think it's fortunate that these two formats are as (ultimately) 'compatible' as they are in that, unlike VHS vs Beta, they are both playable on the same machine once burned and finalized.

why is it ok for dvd burners to be sold but its illegale to use them? and if I buy a vcr-dvd burner thats alright to do but if I use software I can go to jail?

Klingon, I agree and I've been asking this for a while... "Why DVD+RW?". In Beta vs. VHS, there was a reason one would want Beta... Better quality (and to some, a smaller tape size might be important). But I haven't seen anyone say "you should choose DVD+RW over DVD-RW because...". So I believe it's destined for doom. It's only savior is the dual-format drives; if it weren't for those, DVD+RW would probably have even lower sales by now. - Bob

BobL. To give you an idea of the "phony-ness" the +R format..... I was reading a news article some time ago (it might have been referred to from here; I'm not sure). Well, anyway this Asian manufacturer of both disc types was complaining about his lot in life. He had hoped the +R/+RW format would have caught on more than it has because, "The [+R] discs are easier and cheaper to manufacture, and demand a higher price." (Oh joy). Even though they're simpler to make, they have _always_ (as far as I can see) been more expensive to you and me than their -R counterparts. More profit for Mr. Manufacturer. The other day I dug out an old sales receipt from a Canadian store 'Future Shop'. It was for a single Hewlett-Packard +RW disc I bough last year. Guess how much? $14.95 + taxes. (Maybe that's why they call them the "plus" format - because they cost "plus" dollars). As far as I can tell they don't have "plus" performance, and I have extensive experience with both formats. And I have to ask another question. Who, , the above news article notwithstanding, goes out of their way to buy a dual-format burner these days anyway?. They cost more but they don't do any more. Further.... You suggest that, (maybe), it's the dual-format burners that are helping to keep the +R format alive....I <kinda> disagree. I suspect that most folks who end up with dual format burners, end up buying -R media 98% of the time anyway, once they see the price difference and identical [end] performance. Instead, I suggest that one of the last things helping to keep the +R format afloat, is that the manufacturers/retailers now seem to be selling them for a hell of a lot less than they used to. (I recently checked). The price-span between the two is ever-decreasing, because the manufacturers are realizing that people aren't as stoopid as they wish they were. If +R/RW discs had undisputable, concrete benefits (not hyped-up ones) for general use, like much faster burning times or larger disc capacity or were dual-layer, or something, then maybe I could justify the price. (Myself, I'm looking forward to the upcoming Blue Laser discs). Of course, when they get here, they will be available in +R/RW Blue; -R/RW Blue; Light Blue (for occassional 'lite' users); Aqua-Blue; Navy-Blue and Peacock Blue formats, all incompatible, and none better or worse than the others. Just my thoughts...... :=)