home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!husc.harvard.edu!ibhan
- From: ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
- Newsgroups: rec.audio
- Subject: Re: questions on new digital formats
- Message-ID: <ibhan.725943044@husc.harvard.edu>
- Date: 2 Jan 93 02:50:44 GMT
- References: <725768980.2401.0@elara.esl.acs.cmu.edu> <1i2u6fINN529@network.ucsd.edu>
- Lines: 28
- Nntp-Posting-Host: husc8.harvard.edu
-
- mbk@lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:
-
- >kz08+@andrew.cmu.edu (Ken Zuroski) writes:
- >I wonder if it's a marketing mistake, though. I suspect people will
- >pay more for something that looks like a CD then for something that
- >looks like a tape.
-
- Well, I bet the reason is that they wanted the stores to accept it.
- Stores who already have lots of tape racks probably wouldn't be crazy
- about getting totally different racks for an emerging format. It makes
- the transition from tape to MiniDisc easier. Also, DCC uses the same size
- case as analog tapes, so MiniDisc's use of the same size case doesn't let
- DCC have the advantage there.
-
- >From a consumer point of view, the MD players are alot "neater" than
- >DCC players. No rewinding, bump-resistant, and recording as a file-system.
-
- >Clear advantages over DCC. Does b/w compatibility matter that much?
-
- I agree, but I haven't seen any ads in magazines for MiniDisc yet, though
- I've seen quite a few for DCC. Not too smart, Sony. I'm sure they'll
- appear soon, though. Right now, both DCC and MiniDisc are out of my price
- range. There's no doubt in my mind that MiniDisc is the better system.
- I'm just waiting for cheaper/smaller units.
- --
- - Ishir Bhan - ibhan@husc.harvard.edu -
- - - -
- "The sky and the impossible explode..." -The Cure
-