Arucard

Distinguished
Mar 28, 2006
234
0
18,680
Am I correct in assuming that it's better to have an ordinary DVD/CD reader, as well as a burner? I'm assuming it's better not to use the burner unless you're actually burning.
 

jumpmaster

Distinguished
Oct 31, 2004
86
0
18,640
It doesn't really matter you can use the burner to read cd/dvds. I would get two drives just in case you need to copy cd's it will be a lot faster.and if you have two drives and you play games you can just leave the game disk in one of the drives so that you don't have to take the disk out everytime.
 

clue69less

Splendid
Mar 2, 2006
3,622
0
22,780
It doesn't really matter you can use the burner to read cd/dvds. I would get two drives just in case you need to copy cd's it will be a lot faster.and if you have two drives and you play games you can just leave the game disk in one of the drives so that you don't have to take the disk out everytime.

For sure. Optical drives are so cheap these days, I'd go for 2 if the PC is meant for general usage, especially music, photo or video copying. I have two burners in each of my desktops because I'm one of those insecure types that enjoys having backups, redundant systems and a generalized deja-vue environment.
 

ms2005

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2005
73
0
18,630
Don't by anything but a DVD burner as the difference is next to nothing. 2 is best as you can rip on one and burn on the other - and DVD burners have such tight tolerances that they fail more often whan most components so it's handy to have a functioning one while you wait for a warranty repair.
 

Datman

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2004
875
0
18,980
Yeah, I run a combo drive for regular use and a DVD burner for just burning DVD's in my system's.
Sometimes disc's (music/movies) don't like burners and won't show themselves unless in a CD/DVD ROM.