Slot Load vs Tray

Which do you prefer?

  • Slot-Load Drive

    Votes: 16 43.2%

  • Tray

    Votes: 21 56.8%
  • Total voters
    37
U

UltimaParadox

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 8, 2003
Messages
6,243
I noticed there has not been many slot loaded drives for computers, and the main one people wanted were the Toshbia drives.

I did notice however that Plextor is making a slot loaded DVD-burner, while I have always liked the idea of not having to use a tray, is it practical?

Does a slot load drive not hold up as well as a tray, especially considering you will be burning?

Questions and comments are very welcome, and I know the Plex slot load is a bit more expensive, I am not trying to compare cost. I am trying to compare a slot drive vs a tray, if there is any difference when it comes to functionality/
 
I LOVE my Pioneer slot load DVD-ROM! I have a case with a door, so dust isn't a concern, which is the only downfall I see with a slot load drive. I wish there were more models available, as it's much nicer not having to worry about the tray breaking/not ejecting, etc.
 
S1nF1xx said:
I LOVE my Pioneer slot load DVD-ROM! I have a case with a door, so dust isn't a concern, which is the only downfall I see with a slot load drive. I wish there were more models available, as it's much nicer not having to worry about the tray breaking/not ejecting, etc.
Click to expand...

Seems like slot load are not getting much love, but no explanation against it. I think its just one of those things few people have, but the Plextor sloat load drive sounds pretty nice to me. I remember those Pioneer's high quality stuff. People don't sell those anymore do they?
 
TheMostWantedPolishTwin said:
my case is standing on the floor and I think tray is much more confident under this cirucmstances..
Click to expand...

Mine is sitting up on the desk and I have to reach over the tray to put a CD in, but one thing. I do not have a door for my case, its just a standard Lian Li PC61, do you think having a sloat load drive with no door will allow too much dust?
 
The reason you do not see many slot loads anymore is due to safety issues.

Back in the day kenwood had a slot load CDRom, it was like 72x, and at that speed the CDs would shatter and spit shards out the slot. Kinda sucked.

I can see them coming back with slot load DVD players/burners as they do not spin nearly as fast as the 52x cdroms. But I do think they spin at like 48x or something. I am sure hte probably have implemented new safety things to keep it from shattering.
 
Tray. Slot loads seem to have difficulty with some sorts of media, especially DualDisc and damaged media. Also if the drive breaks it would likely be much more difficult to get your media out of a slot load drive intact compared to a tray manually.
 
mrmagoo_83 said:
Back in the day kenwood had a slot load CDRom, it was like 72x, and at that speed the CDs would shatter and spit shards out the slot. Kinda sucked.
Click to expand...
:confused: No, they didn't have slot loading drives. :confused:

I think the real reasons why slot-loading drives haven't seen broad acceptance on the market are the following:

1. Higher production cost.
2. Low operating life due to failure of the eject mechanism (and no practical way to manually override the mechanism).
3. Limited media compatibility--can't load business card CDs or mini (80 mm) CDs and DVDs.

To answer the main question, I have a slot-loading drive. It's a Panasonic CW-8123 slim drive which plays DVD and CD media, and burns on CD-R and CD-RW media.
 
the one logical problem i see with slot load drives is when the drive fails and you cannot get your disk out.

I think they are cool, but im still pro-trey.
 
i dont have a slot load drive but I certainly want one. My computer is on the floor and it's a hassle holding my case door open for the tray to take its time getting out. My case door is propped open a bit by some ghetto contraption but it's not open all the way, everytime i burn a DVD/CD the tray pops open hitting the door when its done and i dont enjoy that very much
 
Pioneer slot load DVD-ROM about 6 years-old, working well, but a door on the case so forth.
It'll be a sad day when it goes.
 
mrmagoo_83 said:
What do you mean they didn't have slot loading drives? You have confused me.
Click to expand...
Didnt you read what xonik quoted? You two are talking about the 72x Kenwood ZEN CD drives... Kenwood never made a slot model of the ZEN.
*****************************
I use a Pioneer 106S slot DVD player and still using a Lite-On 52x32x52 tray cdrw... I would love a slot load for my HT setup that Im putting into an old stereo.
 
OH, I thought they did, could be wrong though, might have been another brand. Kenwood had the 72x and the issues with cds blowing up, I thought they also had the slot loads, oh well.
 
kenwood zen drives spun no faster than any of todays 52x drives the exploding thing was a stupid rumer. The kenwood drive uses more than one laser to boost the speed while keeping the rpm's the same
 
mrmagoo_83 said:
OH, I thought they did, could be wrong though, might have been another brand. Kenwood had the 72x and the issues with cds blowing up, I thought they also had the slot loads, oh well.
Click to expand...
Nah I think your talking about some of the older Pioneer slot loaders. I remember hearing stories about cd's shattering and sending plastic shards shooting out the slot.
 
the simple aspect of having a manual eject is enough for me to stay with a tray
 
***Time To Set The Record Straight***

About the Kenwood, anyway ;)

I am a little familiar with the Kenwood, since i was DETERMINED to get one a while back, but unfortunately, they quickly went out of production. Why? nobody really knows, but perhaps becuase they were too expensive to make, and there were a large amount of recalls of the unit, IIRC.

Now, contrary to some belief, NO, the CDs did no explode or shatter and NO, the drive/disk did not spin at 72X, and NO, it was not a slot-loader. And it was called the the TrueX 72X CD-ROM, NOT "Zen" anything. Zen Research, the company that helped develop the drive with Kenwood, had their logo on the units, but the product from Kenwood was simply called TrueX. Also, the drive used only ONE laser (contrary to what someone mentioned above). This one beam from the laser, however, was diffracted and split into multiple beams, thus covering a larger area on the disk, and therefore in effect getting higher read speeds of (theoretically) 72x.

If you google anything like "kenwood truex 72x" you'll discover a wealth of info out there :)
 
dangfx said:
***Time To Set The Record Straight***

About the Kenwood, anyway ;)

I am a little familiar with the Kenwood, since i was DETERMINED to get one a while back, but unfortunately, they quickly went out of production. Why? nobody really knows, but perhaps becuase they were too expensive to make, and there were a large amount of recalls of the unit, IIRC.

Now, contrary to some belief, NO, the CDs did no explode or shatter and NO, the drive/disk did not spin at 72X, and NO, it was not a slot-loader. And it was called the the TrueX 72X CD-ROM, NOT "Zen" anything. Zen Research, the company that helped develop the drive with Kenwood, had their logo on the units, but the product from Kenwood was simply called TrueX. Also, the drive used only ONE laser (contrary to what someone mentioned above). This one beam from the laser, however, was diffracted and split into multiple beams, thus covering a larger area on the disk, and therefore in effect getting higher read speeds of (theoretically) 72x.

If you google anything like "kenwood truex 72x" you'll discover a wealth of info out there :)
Click to expand...

Yeap this is all true, I actually still have a drive arround myself but it died though. I think that's why they stopped making them, they couldn't make them reliable. That drive was my second one, before my warrenty dried up, and then it died too. They had a lot of legal trouble with their previous drive before that the 62x drive, doing research on that lawsuit might help you find out why they stopped making them.
 
My old roommate had one of these. he still may have it actually. I doubt it is still in use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top