|
|
Posted by Guest on 11/09/06 00:43
--
This post is Sponsored by: www.overheadsoft.com
http://www.linkreferral.com/cgi-bin/linkreferal/adwel.cgi?oldrefid=20013
"Tom Stiller" <tomstiller@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:tomstiller-F2EBFA.17255108112006@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <11s4h.1084$GS2.1008@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
> "Guest" <llcoolj@comcast.com> wrote:
>
>> If you are not used to dealing with high resolution video in it's purist
>> form and only came aboard recently, then your eye for spotting
>> resolutions
>> and details may not be as sharp as others. I have been dealing with
>> high-res video since 1990. I had the Laserdisc, S-VHS VCR, various DVD
>> players and HD. I know what the deal is.
>
> The issue raised has nothing to do with the quality of high resolution
> video or the sound quality of audio, but rather can a wire, or fiber,
> transmitting a bit serial stream compromise the quality of the
> reconstructed analog signal. If transmission line didn't reliable pass
> recognizable ones and zeros, the reconstructed waveform would bear very
> little resemblance to the original.
>
> --
> Tom Stiller
That is the theory, but consider this: if digital info is coming from a
5400rpm hard drive or from a 10,000rpm hard drive, which will be displayed
or accessed first and which will perform better. Cables are like those hard
drives. The longer the distance, the slow the access. The shorter the
distance, the quicker the access. Not to mention build quality helping
transmit the data faster. I also must add that my new cable is only 3' long
compared to the generic one that was 6' long....
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|