Re: Camera Card Reader

Chris Malcolm wrote:
[]
I don't mind upgrades which are improvements. The 405-625 TV change
was purely an improvement. But I note that my digital cable TV
connection, while interference free, doesn't have quite the bandwidth
of a good analogue TV system. But I'm not too fussy about that,
especially considering the industry is moving to HDTV.

... which I suspect will be even more rubbish crammed into even less bandwidth! Whilst some of the digital TV is quite good (technically), other channels are not, particularly where bit-rate has been sacrificed at the expense of packing in more channels.

I am very annoyed that digital radio in the UK employs compression and
encoding methods that introduce a loss of audio quality and obtrusive
artefacts over good analogue FM which is noticeable enough that I
prefer not to have to listen to the news on a digital connection. I'm
*very* annoyed by that. The BBC used to be very proud of the sound
quality their best audio engineers could arrange to be broadcast. It
was once among the best in the world, but on moving to digital
technology they've dropped their standards considerably for commercial
reasons because they hope most people won't notice or care.

Fortunately, I can still listen to FM radio and enjoy a good quality level, and that will probably outlast me. I couldn't agree more about the standards. Interesting that digital has probably brought about an improvement for many still photographers, as opposed to how it's been implemented for radio and TV broadcasting. Perhaps with the economic situation as it is, some of the channels pushing drivel will be forced to close, and more bit-rate made available for the rest. Or perhaps the drivel will survive and the rest be cut back...

[]
I don't object to new improved technology replacing the old. I do
object to the way the computer industry deliberately invents new
technologies and makes the old old obsolete as a way of "persuading"
people to buy new stuff they otherwise wouldn't want or need.

I don't think it's purely deliberate, though. What's the cost of retro-fitting Blu-ray support to all the older OSes? For supporting HD-TV, on processors which can barely manage it? Do you really want to go back to parallel ATA or SCSI disks? Remember how much SCSI disks cost? I agree with the need to question where software companies draw the line, though.

Cheers,
David

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Digital Video has its limitations
    ... > Compression artifacts, giant square pixels that dance around, strobe-like ... data requires such a huge bandwidth, it seems unlikely that we poor ... which was considered "broadcast quality" for many years. ... and more channels into the constrained bandwidth. ...
    (rec.video.production)
  • Re: Ofcom says 4 national HD channels on DTT
    ... But with how much regard to quality? ... They're planning to launch 4 channels in the bandwidth consumed by 3 ... The correct analogy to use is AAC being twice as efficient as MP2, and if you're aware of my views on audio codecs, then you'd know that I'm a big fan of AAC. ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)
  • Re: Ofcom says 4 national HD channels on DTT
    ... But with how much regard to quality? ... They're planning to launch 4 channels in the bandwidth consumed by 3 ... Given your dislike of what the MP2 audio codec can do when strangled ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)
  • What Type of Wireless Should I Use?
    ... Currently theres a 15mbit connection that is always saturated and can ... wimax products out there. ... channels the way say 802.11b does (bandwidth of two channels is less ... than the sum of bandwidth of each channel). ...
    (comp.dcom.telecom)
  • Re: Digital Video has its limitations
    ... >> Compression artifacts, giant square pixels that dance around, strobe-like ... > data requires such a huge bandwidth, it seems unlikely that we poor ... > which was considered "broadcast quality" for many years. ... > and more channels into the constrained bandwidth. ...
    (rec.video.production)