|
|
Posted by Adrian A on 10/14/06 16:39
guv wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 13:58:48 +0100, "Adrian A" <anca@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
>> guv wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 12:52:33 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw"
>>> <dsb@REMOVETHECAPITALSbtinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> ....looking at toslink optic cables, as mine has gone walkies...
>>>>>> and they seem to be making a deal out of the tips being gold.
>>>>>> Now surely this is daft, as the material of the end casing cannot
>>>>>> effect an optical transmission in any way...can it??
>>>>>
>>>>> I would imagine its something to do with electrical current and
>>>>> interference at the point of contact.
>>>>>
>>>>> I dont know if that is the case, but the logic sounds reasonable!
>>>
>>>> its digital.
>>>
>>> I realise that!
>>>
>>>> if the interference was bad enough to make a difference you'd hear
>>>> it - you'd have dropouts and nasty clicking.
>>>
>>> What other reason can you suggest for the notion that using gold is
>>> better?
>>
>> It's just a marketing gimmick, only an idiot would think it makes a
>> difference to an optical signal.
>
> Well I dont regard myself as an idiot and would add that if they are
> claiming there is improved performance - that cannot be gained - they
> risk law suits from trading standards and competitors etc. Whilst they
> may be willing to gamble on this, I've seen nothing to conclusively
> prove there isnt.
>
> You wont argue that all CD or DVD players are equal would you? Thats
> digital also!
Well I haven't read the claims they make so they probably only imply
improved perfmorance, though you could well be regarded as an idiot as you
seem incapable of using apostophes.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|