|
Posted by Axel VK on 04/27/06 10:56
"Groucho" <nowhere@home.invalid> wrote in message
news:4bb1n2F10knpbU1@individual.net...
>
> "Barry McCockiner" <abc@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:260420062222188495%abc@nowhere.com...
>> In article <4banqiFvclmqU1@individual.net>, Rod Speed
>> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Havent found that myself. Just one purchase wasnt
>>> that great in the Pioneer 109, failed to burn reliably
>>> at the outer edge. All the rest have been fine.
>>>
>>> I did get the 109 because it had a reputation
>>> for burning almost anything fine tho.
>>
>> The Pioneer drives *are* really good -- I think you just got some real
>> crap media that would have been unreliable in any burner.
>
> By who's criteria ? Yours? The 109 was fine but the 110 was crap, with
> well documented unresolved problems as far as burning a lot of 16x media
> at 16x. The 111 is too new and firmware still immature.
Hmm. I've got a 110 and have not had any problems whatsoever.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|