Of course, one has to wonder if there ever really was a gold standard
for CD or if all the claims were just more hype and only smoke and
mirrors. While it is a known and accepted fact that with any product
there are "fair, good, better, and best" quality categories, it may be
the case that nbone of the longeviety claims were real to begin with for
even the "best" category; the current difference that we may be
experiencing is that given the free market all the categories have
collapsed into one "fair-good" category.
In light of the fact that both DVDs and CDs use the same materials
essentially and may even be produced in the same fashion, I am inclined
to be skeptical that there is any actual gold standard for them either.
filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk <> wrote:
> Tim Atherton wrote:
>
>> Nothing new there - we basically new that - a lot (many/most?) of
>> CD-R's on the market are crap/cheap/poor product.
>> Also, people don't check the error rates on their equipment
>
> Nooo - what Im alluding to (as a user of Kodak Gold
> CDRs) is that the production of high quality CDRs
> seems to be on the decline ... with the rise of the
> DVD(-)(+)(+_)(xyzab) R(W)(RW)(RRRT)(WW)
>
> It took long enough to find out about the lack of
> longevity of CDRs - where is the gold standard for
> DVD writeables?
>
> bert
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system ().
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
