Re: dual layered DVD's vs single layer etc....
On Sunday 03 December 2006 18:04, Greg Madden wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 21:08:18 +0000
>
> Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> wrote:
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > In article <[🔎] BAY135-F33AE2370EF62B8EFF8193591D80@phx.gbl> you write:
> > >Dear Debian people,
> > >
> > >This is a pretty dumb question. But I think it has a little merit.
> > >I bought myself a new Benq DVD rewriter and stuffed in my box. This
> > >one can handle dual layered DVDs as well as the single ones.
> > >
> > >I then realised after nosing around in the computer shop that dual
> > >layered DVDs have a capacity of 8.5GB c.f. the single layered ones
> > >of 4.4GB.
> >
> > 8.5 billion bytes vs. 4.7 billion bytes.
> >
> > >What a genius this guy is I here you say.
> > >
> > >A doubling of storage is what you would expect.
> > >
> > >My point is that whereas the Sarge 3.1 r3 release contains 15 CDs,
> > >Etch comprises 21 CDs......
> > >
> > >Or 3 DVDs..... But of course these are 3 single layer 4.4 GB DVDs.
> > >
> > >Once Etch comes out and everyones starts to work on Lenny, then
> > >maybe it could get to thirty CDs or 4 or 5 DVDs.
> > >
> > >Once it gets to that size would dual layered DVD iso images be
> > >considered to be parked in the repositories?
> >
> > *maybe*. We had some of this discussion before sarge released, when
> > there was a chance that we might make sarge fit on a single DL
> > DVD. See the debian-cd mailing list archives if you'd like to know
> > more... :-)
>
> Part of this discussion concerned the cost of DL media vs single
> layer.At the time DL was about $8/disk while compared to maybe
> $1.00/disk for SL, not a good value, imho. The economics may have
> changed.
I have a few of them here. I don't use them often but in the case of debian I
would invest a few extra $ to keep the number of disks down. Wasn't so bad
when I was just using i386, now I also use amd64 (soon I will only use amd64)
the number of disks is impressive.. :)
Reply to: