LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [News Around The Web] >> Hardware Reviews



Message


SiliconFreak -> LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (5/4/2006 5:14:53 AM)

As is now almost compulsory, there are two competing standards when it comes to direct disk labelling technologies, but which rules the roost? UKGamer compare the two to see if a clear winner emerges.

"No doubt like me you have dozens, possibly even hundreds of CDs and DVDs scattered throughout your home or office, mostly labelled using CD marker pens, some neatly, some not so neatly, some in great detail, others so vague you're not quite sure what's on them. If you're very organised you may have gone the route of paper labels. When these appeared on the scene they gave users the chance to create and print very high quality labels that really looked rather good, well, once you'd calibrated your printer they did..."
Direct Link: http://www.3dvelocity.com/article.php4?id=311&page=1  Source : 3DVelocity




Zebadee -> RE: LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (5/4/2006 10:54:33 AM)

Hi [:)]
Thanks for the pointer SF.
Interestingly at the end the implication that LF (isn't 6 months old yet) is new technology when compared to LS. LF is Yahama technology based & precedes LS by several years.
Price, the main reason why LS media is cheaper.? More manufacturers signed to go with LS than LF. Hence bigger market share.
Simple economics at work here, nothing more.
With the new disc coating + LS contrast utility for LS. The time taken & finished product already moving up a gear.
LF is already looking jaded, by comparison. Of course they could have something up their sleeve.
In case your wondering, I've got both LS & LF. Which do I prefer? Just bought a couple of sharpies. I think that says it all.[:D]




SithTracy -> RE: LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (5/4/2006 11:16:33 AM)

quote:

I've got both LS & LF. Which do I prefer? Just bought a couple of sharpies. I think that says it all.


Amen to that.  Not sure why would anyone really wants to add 15 - 40 minutes to a burn to do a label.  I use Avery labels when I burn a disc/project I need something visual for.  And that is not very often.  Ink jet printers are nice too, but I don't want one in my home office taking up valuable space.  A sharpie does the job fine and fits in a cup of pens when I am done.




SiliconFreak -> RE: LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (5/4/2006 11:43:31 AM)

Totally agree with you guys...cause although I have LF drive...I VERY rarely actually use it to make labels...sharpie does the job just fine...[8D][:D]

But if we compare those 2 technologies...then my favourite would still be LF....I know its more expensive...but that blue coating is much nicer by my personal opinion....pictures look way better (it would be even better if someone comes up with solution to burn pictures in True Color mode...but until then...at least for me....LF is my nr.1). [:)][;)]




Zebadee -> RE: LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (5/4/2006 3:31:22 PM)

Hi [:)]
LS media is now (technically) available in a variety of colours.
This includes (SF) blue.[8D]




SiliconFreak -> RE: LightScribe versus LabelFlash ! (5/4/2006 7:21:11 PM)

Didnt knew that...I admit...but thats why I have you...to keep me up-to-date with all such news...[:D][;)] Thanks!

But still...LS Blue isnt the same as LF Blue....just like any Red isnt like Ferrari Red....got it?[:)][:D]

Seriously I dont care much....cause like I said...dont use that much...and when I do....LF is my current best choice...mainly because I have LF drive...because if I had LS, I would probably say that LS is better....so its up to each one to decide whats better for him/her...they are both good technologies....and hopefully they'll become even better in the future...AMEN.[;)]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0625