Re: Cute ... I don't know what it is ...

<OzOne> wrote in message news:dn5a1494gj2lt4u7dprbpgrcm11paj9u4a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:45:02 +1000, "Jason James" <at@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"the_dawggie" <the_dawggie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >news:6o7Rj.5560$ko5.5516@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> David Z wrote:
> >>
> >> > What's VHS?
> >>
> >> A video tape technology that should not have replaced
> >> BETA.
> >
> >True. How did VHS manage to get ahead of Beta? At first Beta hire
movies
> >were available,..but not for long. Beta IIRC had superior frequency
response
> >and therefore definition. Only thing I can imagine happened, was vested
> >interest in VHS had much more money to force the movie companies to use
it.
> >Money speaks all languages.
> >
> >Jason
> >
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2003/jan/25/comment.comment
>
> Read
Most interesting. His article was a little short on technical differences,
but he is saying they are essentially the same. In any case, the lack of
tape length is a major short-coming. Admittedly they could half the speed
as
with LP on VHS,..but still VHS has the edge eg when recording the Bathurst
car-race. Run a 3 or 4 hour tape on LP.
The remarks about digital audio cassettes prompted my memory that it was
somehow torpedoed about 17 years ago. "Whole technology" or not,..the
difference between a tape running 1-7/8"sec and digital, is like night and
day. Wholly worth the change.

Jason