Quantcast
You are not logged in, click here to log in.
39 Replies Last post: Nov 30, 2008 10:05 AM by chasrails   Go to original post 1 2 3 Previous Next
Click to view RogerKni's profile New Member 4 posts since
Apr 26, 2008
30. Nov 17, 2008 11:47 PM in response to: tokyojerry
Re: The book of MacBook

"given
the digital era, for all practical purposes, tape is dead."

Canon doesn't think so.

"For practical purposes
though, random selection and accessibility of media playback, digital
is far superior"

Most people agree. But some people prefer tape, or at least would like to use it occasionally, for the reasons mentioned in my quote.

"try to keep that magnetic media around for a couple of decades and then lets review the quality"

It's not ideal if it is the only copy--but it would make a good backup copy--as a protection against loss. (Assuming the user copies the tape to his computer, edits out the portions he doesn't want, and saves the highlights to disk and/or DVD.) With tapeless models, the original gets overwritten--and storing the entire original on disk becomes expensiv if there is lots of videotaping done. (As you acknowledge, "For archival
purposes, there might be some practical utility.")

The purpose of my quote wasn't to prove that tape is thriving, or deserves to thrive, but only that it's hanging on, and may well keep hanging on, as evidenced by the recent release of a top-quality HD camcorder by a major mfgr. This disproves overstatements that tape has no future, "IS dead," etc.

Click to view RogerKni's profile New Member 4 posts since
Apr 26, 2008
31. Nov 17, 2008 11:48 PM in response to: RogerKni
Re: The book of MacBook
PS: Excuse me for all the indentations above--they occurred by accident.
Click to view tbutler67's profile New Member 36 posts since
Jan 6, 2006
32. Nov 18, 2008 4:00 AM in response to: RogerKni
Re: The book of MacBook
RogerKni wrote:
The purpose of my quote wasn't to prove that tape is thriving, or deserves to thrive, but only that it's hanging on, and may well keep hanging on, as evidenced by the recent release of a top-quality HD camcorder by a major mfgr. This disproves overstatements that tape has no future, "IS dead," etc.

I suppose it all depends on context and what you mean by 'no future'. I agree that tape is still used extensively at the pro and even prosumer level, just as Betamax was used as a professional format for many years after it was effectively dead at the consumer level. But that doesn't mean anything when you're out shopping for a camcorder for a Christmas present (well, unless you're giving one to a pro and have very deep pockets). I think most people here are talking about that consumer marketplace, what you can find when you walk into a Best Buy or a MicroCenter (or even a Fry's, J&R, or a Nebraska Furniture Mart).

So, looking at it from the consumer context... well, when camcorders first came down to the consumer level, they were almost all VHS. (I still have the JVC deck my father got back in the 80's, where the tape mechanism and tuner were two separate equal-sized boxes, so you didn't have to sling the entire thing over your shoulder while trying to hold a separate camera in your hand.) Then VHC-C came in, and standard VHS camcorders disappeared. VHS-C was replaced by Hi-8/Digital8, which was supplanted by MiniDV. Now in the consumer electronics stores, as I said earlier in the thread, I'm seeing the exact same pattern with tapeless camcorders and MiniDV as I saw with MiniDV and Hi-8/Digital8: first a couple of models, then a whole generation of models taking up a significant chunk of market share, until now the majority of camcorders are tapeless. Sure, you can still get tape-based camcorders, but they're now a minority. (And FireWire based models are a small subset of that minority.)

That's our data. What conclusions can we draw from it? If it follows the pattern of other camcorder formats, which it seems to be doing so far, that would certainly suggest that tape-based models are on their way out; new models may continue to be released, but fewer and fewer as time goes on. Does that mean that tape 'has no future' or 'is dead'? You can make a reasonable argument that tape isn't strictly 'dead' as long as new models are being produced - but if they become expensive and/or hard to find at ordinary consumer outlets, what's the practical difference? Likewise, if a few consumer models continue to be produced for 'tape-o-philes', you could argue that tape technically has a future... but is that going to matter to the average consumer who just wants to walk into Best Buy and grab something that will be quick and simple for them to pick up?
Click to view tokyojerry's profile New Member 5 posts since
Nov 13, 2008
33. Nov 18, 2008 4:30 AM in response to: tbutler67
Re: The book of MacBook
@tbutler67

Well-stated. That pretty much sums up my feeling and what I wanted to express. Fundamentally, at the consumer level anyway, tape is out. You can say the same about vinyl recorders too. Yeah, they exist, in used record shops, antique shops etc., and yes you can still by turntables if you hunt for them. But CDs have supplanted that. And frankly, I think even CDs will go by the way of the DoDo bird as well since DVDs can do everything CDs can and more. In fact, I would not be surprised to see both go as now we are in the age of digital audio and video files, digital downloading, enjoying, archiving.

Back to DV tapes, yes, here in Japan where I can monitor this activity first hand, there is an occasional model from Canon and whoever that will put the token DV tape model on the market. But but and large, the consumer products are either hard-disk-based, SDHC (memory card)-based, mini-DVD and mini-BD-DVD-based, and so on. That's the trend, and the market. And, those will eventually give way to SSD-based, etc. Yes, tape 'exists', and, VHS tapes can still be purchased, but that's the end of it.


Jerry Tokyo, Japan
Click to view sirboom's profile New Member 4 posts since
Nov 19, 2008
34. Nov 19, 2008 7:44 PM in response to: Macworld
Re: The book of MacBook
This is not a good article. It's all positive. What about the fact that the Macbooks LCD is horrible? Hello?
Click to view sirboom's profile New Member 4 posts since
Nov 19, 2008
35. Nov 19, 2008 7:51 PM in response to: montgomery_burns
Re: The book of MacBook
Agreed 100%! And when are we going to get a 14.1" Macbook Pro?!?!?!
Click to view sirboom's profile New Member 4 posts since
Nov 19, 2008
36. Nov 19, 2008 7:54 PM in response to: jdb8167
Re: The book of MacBook
The question is, when is Apple going to realize that some of us out here want a 13" or 14" Macbook Pro?! 15" is massive! We can plug into a monitor if we need more room!
Click to view Oliver99's profile New Member 1 posts since
Nov 20, 2008
37. Nov 20, 2008 1:21 PM in response to: Macworld
Re: The book of MacBook
"Simply put, the display is gorgeous."

Simply put, you're blind.

Even the staff at my local Apple store admit that the Macbook has a very poor LCD panel. I find myself squatting lower and lower as I look at it, trying to find an ideal angle, as if playing limbo. It's worse than any PC notebook display I could find at Circuit City.

The reflection issue is a total red herring. I'm sorry so many people have such poor visal acuity that this pathetic screen is deemed passable in a very expensive notebook.
Click to view DonaldGould's profile New Member 1 posts since
Mar 27, 2008
38. Nov 27, 2008 10:05 AM in response to: Macworld
Re: The book of MacBook
No new notebook for me until Apple the Glossy Display, the chiclet keys, and adds USB-3... if I live that long.
Click to view chasrails's profile New Member 1 posts since
Nov 28, 2008
39. Nov 30, 2008 10:05 AM in response to: Dan Moren
Re: The book of MacBook
The lack of a matte display option is certainly a legitimate concern, but I don't understand why discussions of the new Macbook display tend to focus on that one issue when the new display is so poor regardless of that issue. I own an Air, which has a truly wonderful glossy screen. The main problem with the new Macbook display is not that it is glossy, it is that it is 'excessively reflective' on the glass surface. I've compared side-by-side an Air and a new Macbook, and the displays are very, very different. The new Macbook display is far more reflective, and to me this is very distracting even at maximum brightness. I do not believe the new Macbook would be very usable outdoors, and I especially wonder why Apple thought an indoor-only notebook would be a 'good fit' for students (or anyone else for that matter!). The Air display is also far superior with respect to color and warmth -- but I expect this might be addressable via a future firmware upgrade.

I'm very disappointed with MacWorld magazine -- I expected a true unbiased review that might help motivate Apple to fix this problem, but instead it was brushed aside. Why? This is not a subjective concern, or one that takes a discerning eye -- it is an obvious issue that smacks you in the face. I'd be interested in hearing about how and when Apple will fix this display. I'd be interested in whether a firmware fix could resolve other reported issues (e.g., the bluish tinting).

So please, let's not just focus on the 'matte versus glossy' issue, but also (and arguably more important) the glossy versus 'excessively reflective' issue. Thank you.