Posted by guv on 10/14/06 15:04

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!

[Back to original message]