[matthew]

Can someone please explain to me the difference between these 2 & why RAW is "supposed" to be better?

Every image starts as raw format. This is the data as captured by the sensor, with minimal interpretation and no further processing.

Saving the raw data stops the process here. No further interpretation or processing is done in the camera.

Capturing a jpeg image continues the process by applying various settings, some configurable (sharpness, contrast, saturation) and some not. It then saves the interpreted data in the compression level you select, out of a range of options given to you by the camera. All of the decisions are made by the camera, without regard to their effect on the image. While you may modify the image that the camera produces, you can never undo the camera's decisions.

Which one is better depends on how much work you want to do to get the shot just right, and how much control you want to have. Sometimes the camera's settings are good enough, and you don't want to spend additional time developing the image. Other times you may want to have more flexibility, or be willing to spend a few more minutes - each - to get your photos just perfect.

I use jpeg for casual shots, and raw for ones that matter more. When my wife's doing a triathlon, I capture in jpeg for crowd shots and anything else that she (or friends) aren't in. I can shoot hundreds of these (I get bored). When I know she'll be passing me soon, I switch to raw, for maximum flexibility for the few photos that will actually matter. If you don't have enough card space for an entire wedding in raw, you might want to consider a similar approach.