They say they used a Lite-On SHW-16H5S...do they mean the 165H6S?
Sigh...Lite-On's model numbers STILL confuse me.
Interesting article, though.
Nothing truly surprising, however.
I can't comment on the Lite-On drives. But I've noticed a trend; the drives reporting the lowest number of errors to the highest:
I've also noticed that when it comes to reading damaged/dirty media, the order is the same: The Plex is the best, the NEC the worst.
Which leads me to an interesting conculsion: The Lite-On reports the lowest overall PIE/PIF levels. Thus, it should be the best at reading dirty/damaged discs.
Again, I can't comment on the Lite-On drive YET; but my past experince with Lite-On's has told me they suck
at reading dirty/damaged discs (talking DVD-ROM/Combo drives, not burners).
So: They good at it or not?
Either way, I do perfer the BenQ for scanning...seems a nice middle ground, even if it does show some bias vs. media burned in certain drives (ie, mine always shows a BIG error spike on discs burned by my NEC drive)...
Their page on consistency was interesting - On the BenQ, the 4 pass showed much higher error levels. Hmm...hot drive, anyone?
I always give the drive a good 5 minutes to cool between scans. When burning, I limit myself to 3 discs back-to-back before giving the drive a break.
BenQ 1655, BenQ 1620, LG 4167, Plex PX-716SA, Samsung SH-S162L, SH-S182M, Pioneer 111D, Lite-On SHM-165H6S and 1.9TB of HDDs to feed 'em and an X2/4800 to crunch for 'em.