|
|
Posted by POD {ҿ} on 06/15/40 11:39
Finding Nemo would have been vastly more exciting had guv
<guv69@msn.com> been looking for him. instead of writing this in
uk.media.dvd:
> On 06 Feb 2006 21:38:44 GMT, "POD {ҿ}"
> <DONT.EVEN.TRY.IT@DEADSPAM.COM> wrote:
>
>>Finding Nemo would have been vastly more exciting had guv
>><guv69@msn.com> been looking for him. instead of writing this in
>>news:7d1fu11cq9v2clfdo7nbhfhtl0pd5ou00r@4ax.com:
>>
>>> It if performs a better burn, then surely that potentially makes it
>>> more compatible?
>>
>>Not really, it's all down to symantecs. The compatability is all down
>>to how it was authored, and it should play on anything, it's a quality
>>issue, rather than a compatability one.
>
> If that were the case, burning the exact image should be the same
> regardless. Ive had faster burns of an identical image cause the
> "stutter" problems, but the slower burn play 100% ok - using the same
> media from the same pack.
>
>
>
Aye, the problem is your read laser, not coping too well with the
quicker burn, it's not as acurate as it should be. The point I'm making
is a pedantic one, in that it's not a compatability problem, but a
quality issue.
--
Thank you kindly
POD {ҿ}
"Girls, don't you wish your fella was hot like me?"
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|