[nightglider1]

QUOTE (pupkick @ 13 Aug 2004, 20:06)QUOTE (tibius181 @ 13 Aug 2004, 15:00) digital is just another waist of reasearch money l
Perhaps instead of Slots, you should research a dictionary for a while.

ROFLMAO!

 

[nightglider1]

Now, I've got to say that having only 2 options, for/against, makes this a difficult poll in which to vote. I'd have to say that my answer would be "it depends -- I'll have to wait and see"

I'm sure there are forum members who have had the privilege of trying digital racing, but I'm sure there are many who have not.

-- Pete

 

[nightglider1]

QUOTE (JAK @ 16 Aug 2004, 08:22)If I remember my history correctly Betemax was a much better system than VHS but those with the money ganged up against Sony? and flooded the market with an inferior product.
Off topic, but I had to throw my 2 cents in on the betamax bit --

Betamax is a format which is much closer to professional-quality broadcast equipment. The upside was better audio/video fidelity. The downside is that the tapes were really freakin short.

JVC (Victor Company of Japan) developed the VHS format which more or less reversed the traits of Betamax. Users got longer record times, but sacrificed audio/video quality.

I suppose it's a quality v. quantity issue.

[rant] Sort of like me and my laserdisc player. The original Star Wars trilogy cost me $250.00 US, and the films are spread across 9 discs. The same three films (ok, the special <gag> editions) will take up one DVD each, for a lot less money. Of course, LD's were already on the way out, but the introduction of DVD killed them for good.

Again -- quality v. quantity [/rant]

-- Pete