What exactly is the difference between "+" and "-" DVDs,and why are there so many compatiblity issues with "+" discs??
Fairly technical explanation on Wikipedia, but in a nutshell, DVD+R is a newer and supposedly improved format, but because it is newer it has compatibility problems with older drives.
There's also DVD-RAM and DVD-RW. In 2011, I think a DVD+R or DVD-R should play back fine in all recent-vintage computer drives and DVD players. Curiously, it's getting harder and harder to find a DVD-ROM-only drive. A lot of manufacturers are leaning more towards Blu-ray, and the economics are pushing DVD out.
Some burning software will allow you to change the bit for a DVD+R and write it as DVD-ROM, making it more compatible with old DVD players. I had a 1996/7 Toshiba DVD player that would not recognize my DVD+R's unless I did this.
Yet another Sony-driven incompatibility. Once burned, will play in most DVD drives. Functionally very similar to DVD-R, discs/drives are different. DVD-RAM is very different (Panasonic, Pioneer), it is a very stable, rewriteable DVD that works more like a hard drive. It was too late - had it been available when DVD came out it would be likely a standard. -/+RW discs are generally not used for permanent use
DVD-R discs have better support from standalone DVD players because the format was first on the market. DVD+R discs have more reliable technology and are better suited for data storage due to most computer optical drives supporting both formats and the lack of support among early standalone DVD players. DVD+R DL discs also have much wider support than DVD-R DL discs.
DVD-RAM was (and is) a great, great format, very reliable even under tough conditions. It's still used to this day as a standard location sound format for motion picture and TV dialog, and you can erase the discs many times and they re-record extremely well. But like all disc-based formats, DVD-RAM (and DVD-R, DVD+R, DVD-RW, and DVD+RW) are going by the wayside in favor of data delivery, usually via the net or a solid-state drive. Absolutely true. I have no idea why DVD-R dual-layer discs are so hard to find. Weird how that happened. I think there were some behind-the-scenes royalty shenanigans with Pioneer, who apparently controlled some of those patents; Philips and Mitsubishi co-developed DVD+R DL, and I suspect they cut a better royalty deal with the blank disk manufacturers.
+/-RW discs are a pain in the **** if you use them in a standalone dvd recorder for use as a vcr vhs taping replacement, i.e., recording programs, then erasing them to be used again. Having used multliple players and multiple brands and multiple brands of +/-RW discs, these types of re-recordable discs don't last very long before throwing up error messages. Sometimes you can get them to work again by reformatting, but that doesn't work all the time either. Too bad RAM discs were only limited to Pioneer and Panasonic dvd recorder models.
In the back of my head, I am under the impression that DVD+R was closer to an actual pressed DVD than DVD-R is. Could be mistaken, though.
This thread is really eerie, considering OP probably never lived to see your responses. RIP Drawer L.
If you have a burner that can do bit-setting, you can use DVD+R, and change the booktype to DVD-ROM, which will allow for the most compatibility of any blank disc. If none of the above makes any sense, stick with DVD-R for less headache and better compatibility.
I'm under the impression that DVD+R and DVD-R are the same deal and one is no better and it is simply that your recorder must record to what you have fed it + or _ . Playback seems exactly the same to me, both play on every machine and drive I have tried them on. With DL discs, this is not the case, and DVD+R media is often recommended, said to be better both for recording and playback in general..
I'm honestly not sure if they're even making DVD-RAM disks any more. I think it's a dead format at this point. Big in 2000-2010, not so much today.