|
|
We are embarking on digitally archiving a large (college band) analog
music library into some lossless format, be it, FLAC, WMA lossless,
WAV, etc and are evaluating what we should use.
Is there any truth to the rumor that WMA lossless is not going to be
supported in the future since no portable devices (including Zune)
support it for lossless playback, and the ones that do actually
convert it to lossy? We dont want to hitch our horses, so to speak,
to a dead technology.
Also, if this rumor is true, what would be a good lossless codec to
use? Lossy compression is out of the question as we need to be able
to reproduce all the data 20 years from now if needed in future
formats. We dont want to lose ANY of our bits and bytes by using
lossy compression.
|
|
From: "RickH"
[Quoted Text] > Also, if this rumor is true, what would be a good
> lossless codec to use? Lossy compression is out of the
> question as we need to be able to reproduce all the data
> 20 years from now if needed in future formats. We dont
> want to lose ANY of our bits and bytes by using lossy
> compression.
The safest choice would be a zipped uncompressed WAV. And I
am not kidding: lossless music compression more or less
achieves around 50% compression, which is roughly the same
as zip. Of course, you will not be able to play the files
directly without unzipping them first. If direct playback is
important to you, go with FLAC: since it is open source, it
is unlikely to disappear on a whim and you can store the
source code somewhere for safekeeping and porting if need
be. If you want a widely supported lossless format, look for
Dolby lossless formats (MLP or TrueHD): since they are used
in HD DVD and BluRay, they are more likely to be supported
on devices than WMAL or FLAC (but finding encoders is going
to be still hard and you may have to pay a fee to use them,
you should check on dolby.com).
--
// Alessandro Angeli
// MVP :: DirectShow / MediaFoundation
// mvpnews at riseoftheants dot com
// http://www.riseoftheants.com/mmx/faq.htm
|
|
On 10 May 2007 12:06:09 -0700, RickH wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Is there any truth to the rumor that WMA lossless is not going to be
> supported in the future since no portable devices (including Zune)
> support it for lossless playback, and the ones that do actually
> convert it to lossy?
Where did you hear that?
Google for: gigabeat wma lossless
Also, IIRC, my Creative Zen PMC supports lossless.
And why would MS dump WMA lossless even if portable devices didn't support
it? It's still the most pure from of WMA for playback on a PC and the XBOX
360 supports it too.
In any case, if you're concerned about what's going to happen 20 years from
now, I second Alessandro's suggestions.
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
On May 10, 2:43 pm, "The March Hare [MVP]" <p...[ at ]ndsm.maps> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On 10 May 2007 12:06:09 -0700, RickH wrote: > > > Is there any truth to the rumor that WMA lossless is not going to be > > supported in the future since no portable devices (including Zune) > > support it for lossless playback, and the ones that do actually > > convert it to lossy? > > Where did you hear that? > > Google for: gigabeat wma lossless > > Also, IIRC, my Creative Zen PMC supports lossless. > > And why would MS dump WMA lossless even if portable devices didn't support > it? It's still the most pure from of WMA for playback on a PC and the XBOX > 360 supports it too. > > In any case, if you're concerned about what's going to happen 20 years from > now, I second Alessandro's suggestions. > > -- > Please read this before replying: > 1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm> 2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything) > 3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
Microsoft chose to not support it in Zune they must know something
about it's demise, no? It's a shame because the music world needs
more lossless choices not fewer, and a lossless only music seller is a
largely un-tapped marketing opportunity. Most of what I have heard
has been on newsgroups that discuss players, and high-end audiophile
groups longing for somebody to offer audiophile-grade music
reproduction in digital form.
|
|
On 10 May 2007 12:06:09 -0700, RickH wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Is there any truth to the rumor that WMA lossless is not going to be
> supported in the future since no portable devices (including Zune)
> support it for lossless playback, and the ones that do actually
> convert it to lossy? We dont want to hitch our horses, so to speak,
> to a dead technology.
With the WMC framework it is converted to uncompressed PCM if the streaming
target does not support it.
> Also, if this rumor is true, what would be a good lossless codec to
> use? Lossy compression is out of the question as we need to be able
> to reproduce all the data 20 years from now if needed in future
> formats. We dont want to lose ANY of our bits and bytes by using
> lossy compression.
I've heard nothing about it going away. If anything it's really only just
getting started.
Although my preference is always for an open format for which source code
is available, e.g. FLAC, or Ogg FLAC (FLAC in an Ogg Stream). Downside is
you don't get out of the box Windows support, you have to install it.
--
http://www.chrisnet.net/code.htm
[MS MVP for DirectShow / MediaFoundation]
|
|
On 10 May 2007 13:07:20 -0700, RickH wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Microsoft chose to not support it in Zune they must know something
> about it's demise, no?
No. The Zune is intended for the mass market. My guess is that there
research showed most people don't care about lossless.
> It's a shame because the music world needs
> more lossless choices not fewer, and a lossless only music seller is a
> largely un-tapped marketing opportunity.
You have made an invalid assumption as far as I can see. WMA Lossless is
not going away.
> Most of what I have heard
> has been on newsgroups that discuss players, and high-end audiophile
> groups longing for somebody to offer audiophile-grade music
> reproduction in digital form.
I doubt the general consumer has a clue about this. That is Microsoft's
sweet spot. My experience has been that they leave the niche markets to
others. Some sites offer lossless. For example, Discipline Global Mobile,
sample http://dgmlive.com/archive.htm?artist=5&show=419 , offers MP3 and
FLAC options.
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
On May 10, 3:27 pm, "The March Hare [MVP]" <p...[ at ]ndsm.maps> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On 10 May 2007 13:07:20 -0700, RickH wrote: > > > Microsoft chose to not support it in Zune they must know something > > about it's demise, no? > > No. The Zune is intended for the mass market. My guess is that there > research showed most people don't care about lossless. > > > It's a shame because the music world needs > > more lossless choices not fewer, and a lossless only music seller is a > > largely un-tapped marketing opportunity. > > You have made an invalid assumption as far as I can see. WMA Lossless is > not going away. > > > Most of what I have heard > > has been on newsgroups that discuss players, and high-end audiophile > > groups longing for somebody to offer audiophile-grade music > > reproduction in digital form. > > I doubt the general consumer has a clue about this. That is Microsoft's > sweet spot. My experience has been that they leave the niche markets to > others. Some sites offer lossless. For example, Discipline Global Mobile, > sample http://dgmlive.com/archive.htm?artist=5&show=419, offers MP3 and > FLAC options. > > -- > Please read this before replying: > 1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm> 2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything) > 3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
iTunes and iPods are well into supporting Apple lossless so maybe
there is a place for WMA lossless as a competing product some day, but
it will be the usual Microsoft pattern of playing catch up.
|
|
"RickH" <passport[ at ]windcrestsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:1178823969.586281.32180[ at ]e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
[Quoted Text] > We are embarking on digitally archiving a large (college band) analog
> music library into some lossless format, be it, FLAC, WMA lossless,
> WAV, etc and are evaluating what we should use.
>
> Is there any truth to the rumor that WMA lossless is not going to be
> supported in the future since no portable devices (including Zune)
> support it for lossless playback, and the ones that do actually
> convert it to lossy? We dont want to hitch our horses, so to speak,
> to a dead technology.
>
> Also, if this rumor is true, what would be a good lossless codec to
> use? Lossy compression is out of the question as we need to be able
> to reproduce all the data 20 years from now if needed in future
> formats. We dont want to lose ANY of our bits and bytes by using
> lossy compression.
Your concerns are the main reason open standards (as opposed to proprietary)
exist and why many people shun proprietary lock-in solutions. You'll likely
never be left in the dust with FLAC, even decades from now. WMA on the other
hand...
|
|
On 10 May 2007 13:57:17 -0700, RickH wrote:
[Quoted Text] > iTunes and iPods are well into supporting Apple lossless so maybe
> there is a place for WMA lossless as a competing product some day, but
> it will be the usual Microsoft pattern of playing catch up.
Really?!?! MS is dominant in the DAP market aren't they? ;) I knew I
shouldn't have skipped all those Apple commercials on my MCE which has all
my CDs in WM lossless and I should have stopped transferring them to my
Gigabeat because although I can hear them apparently MS doesn't do that
yet.
LOL
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
On May 10, 5:48 pm, "The March Hare [MVP]" <p...[ at ]ndsm.maps> wrote:
[Quoted Text] > On 10 May 2007 13:57:17 -0700, RickH wrote: > > > iTunes and iPods are well into supporting Apple lossless so maybe > > there is a place for WMA lossless as a competing product some day, but > > it will be the usual Microsoft pattern of playing catch up. > > Really?!?! MS is dominant in the DAP market aren't they? ;) I knew I > shouldn't have skipped all those Apple commercials on my MCE which has all > my CDs in WM lossless and I should have stopped transferring them to my > Gigabeat because although I can hear them apparently MS doesn't do that > yet. > > LOL > > -- > Please read this before replying: > 1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm> 2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything) > 3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
I never heard of the Gigabeat, I'll have to look into it, I'll also
have to see the jazz catalog at music giant to see if it's worthwhile
subscribing there for me, if they have the Verve, Concord and Bluenote
catalogs I may join, I dont like the DRM "only 5 computers thing"
though, so will probably stick to CD's and rip them without DRM.
Gigabeat apparently is the only (non WinCE, non windows PDA) device
that will play WMA lossless and MG the only music service doing WMA
lossless. I really wanted a Zune but was disappointed and somewhat
shocked that MS chose to not support it's own format, from a consumer
standpoint that kinda fails the snicker test and makes the Zune look
like any other $15 WalMart mp3 player. If MS cant support WMA, who
else will?
|
|
On 11 May 2007 09:25:39 -0700, RickH wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I never heard of the Gigabeat, I'll have to look into it, I'll also
> have to see the jazz catalog at music giant to see if it's worthwhile
> subscribing there for me, if they have the Verve, Concord and Bluenote
> catalogs I may join, I dont like the DRM "only 5 computers thing"
> though, so will probably stick to CD's and rip them without DRM.
That's what I do for some music. However, the access to 2 million plus
songs feature is cool for $120 a year or whatever Yahoo, Urge, etc are
charging these days.
It let's you explore stuff in much better way than a 30 second sample. For
example, yesterday I listened to the complete B*tches Brew sessions (4 CDs
worth) as part of my subscription. And at 192 kpbs it sounds reasonably
good to me compared to my CDs which are burned at lossless.
> Gigabeat apparently is the only (non WinCE, non windows PDA) device
> that will play WMA lossless and MG the only music service doing WMA
> lossless.
I already wrote that my Creative Zen PMC does. Anything that is Portable
Media Center based supports WMA lossless.
> I really wanted a Zune but was disappointed and somewhat
> shocked that MS chose to not support it's own format, from a consumer
> standpoint that kinda fails the snicker test and makes the Zune look
> like any other $15 WalMart mp3 player. If MS cant support WMA, who
> else will?
They support WMA just not lossless. If it's important to the market they
can add it but I expect the general consumer isn't even aware of the
difference. I don't have a Zune because it doesn't support Plays for Sure
and opted for a new type of DRM. That was a more boneheaded move than not
supporting lossless, IMO.
Supported formats:
Audio
* Windows Media Audio Standard (.wma) - up to 320 Kbps, CBR and VBR, up
to 48-kHz sample rate
* MP3 (.mp3) - up to 320 Kbps, CBR and VBR, up to 48-kHz sample rate
* AAC (.mp4, .m4a, .m4b, .mov) - up to 320 Kbps, Low Complexity (LC),
up to 48-kHz sample rate
Video
* Windows Media Video (.wmv) - up to 320x240 and 1.692 Mbps
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
From: "The March Hare [MVP]"
[Quoted Text] >> Gigabeat apparently is the only (non WinCE, non windows
>> PDA) device that will play WMA lossless and MG the only
>> music service doing WMA lossless.
>
> I already wrote that my Creative Zen PMC does. Anything
> that is Portable Media Center based supports WMA lossless.
PMC is a flavor of WinCE just like WindowsMobile.
> * Windows Media Audio Standard (.wma) - up to 320
> Kbps, CBR and VBR, up to 48-kHz sample rate
> * MP3 (.mp3) - up to 320 Kbps, CBR and VBR, up to
> 48-kHz sample rate
> * AAC (.mp4, .m4a, .m4b, .mov) - up to 320 Kbps, Low
> Complexity (LC), up to 48-kHz sample rate
AAC-LC, not AAC-HE :-( But I think the iPod doesn't support
HE either.
> Video
>
> * Windows Media Video (.wmv) - up to 320x240 and 1.692
> Mbps
WMV7, WMV8, WMV9, WMV9AP or VC-1?
--
// Alessandro Angeli
// MVP :: DirectShow / MediaFoundation
// mvpnews at riseoftheants dot com
// http://www.riseoftheants.com/mmx/faq.htm
|
|
RH- [10 May 2007 12:06:09 -0700]:
>supported in the future since no portable devices (including Zune)
>support it for lossless playback
Either of the (software) players below do WMA-
lossless, and can do FLAC (and one can also do
ALAC, and the other even wav/pcm 192|96/24 (o).
First, lossless can get you 40-60% compression;
the hotter the signal levels the less the
compression, among other factors. The .zip
idea is not that great since you can't get better
than about 10% with plain zip. Second, in 20 yrs
none of the current (I can't really say "popular"
because none are) LL codecs will be in use, and
very likely not even PCM (as a then-current
method). Third, lossless in general never was
alive, other than by way of CD. CD is already
a fine archive method and will still be playable
in 20 years, sort of like a vinyl LP is now (only
it won't sound any different after 20 years).
It's also possible (uncompressed) audio will stay
pretty much the way it is now, in which case, I'd
say go with FLAC, or better, plain old CDs (pretty
robust in error correction). Refresh the stock
every five years. Keep multiple copies. The
usual... (which few practice).
--
40th Floor - Software [ at ] http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com iPlay advanced audio player
zircon.40th.com Zircon mobile music player
|
|
From: "hel[ at ]40th.com"
[Quoted Text] > The .zip
> idea is not that great since you can't get better
> than about 10% with plain zip.
I usually get roughly the same compression ratio as with
lossless audio compression, that is around 50% and not 10%.
> plain old CDs (pretty
> robust in error correction).
CD-DAs are mode-2 discs so they practically have almost no
EC at all and limited ED. Unless you mean files stored on a
mode-1 CD/DVD-ROM, which will have a good ED and decent EC,
even though it is still better to add better-than-CRC32 hash
files to enhance the ED and shadow files to make the EC more
robust.
--
// Alessandro Angeli
// MVP :: DirectShow / MediaFoundation
// mvpnews at riseoftheants dot com
// http://www.riseoftheants.com/mmx/faq.htm
|
|
AA- [Sat, 12 May 2007 04:13:48 -0400]:
>I usually get roughly the same compression ratio
[with .zip]
>as with lossless audio compression, that is around 50% and not 10%.
Show me (show yourself). It sounds (and is)
absurd, but then you only have to prove what
you claim. Zip up your favorite CD, all 700
MB, and show the .zip contents. Here's one
wav I did earlier:
07 03 13 19:23 25,319,324 This_Song_Has_No_Title_[Elton_John_gybr05].wav
07 05 12 00:58 22,301,245 x2.zip
Right around 10%. Here's a -5 flac:
05 04 11 10:19 13,486,851 This_Song_Has_No_Title_[Elton_John_gybr05].flac
Right around 47%.
>even though it is still better to add better-than-CRC32 hash
>files to enhance the ED and shadow files to make the EC more
>robust.
There's always something better, even if you
just imagine it (like you are). That it won't
be done is the crux. You won't get better than
doing it on a CD, simply because you won't
(couldn't/wouldn't) bother to do it at all.
In 20 years... right.
--
40th Floor - Software [ at ] http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com iPlay advanced audio player
zircon.40th.com Zircon mobile music player
|
|
me:
>be done is the crux. You won't get better than
>doing it on a CD, simply because you won't
>(couldn't/wouldn't) bother to do it at all.
This is to say to create audio CDs, not data
discs (I suppose that's what you thought).
Data discs won't get you the (free) robustness,
but you can cram a lot on a DVD, if you want to
go that route.
In 20 years, though, you can play that audio
CD anywhere. The DVD (as data files) may be
a problem.
--
40th Floor - Software [ at ] http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com iPlay advanced audio player
zircon.40th.com Zircon mobile music player
|
|
On Fri, 11 May 2007 14:52:21 -0400, Alessandro Angeli wrote:
[Quoted Text] > WMV7, WMV8, WMV9, WMV9AP or VC-1?
Don't know, probably WMV9 but I just pulled this information from the Zune
site.
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
On Sat, 12 May 2007 09:55:49 -0700, hel[ at ]40th.com wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Show me (show yourself). It sounds (and is)
> absurd, but then you only have to prove what
> you claim.
I think Alessandro was using zip in the general compression sense. Why
would anyone use regular .zip to do something like this when there are open
source alternatives that are better?
In any case, using 7zip's .zip implementation you can get 20% compression,
using it with bzip2 you get 2/3 the size and to 62% with LZMA. That's what
I got with Schiff/Perenyi: Beethoven's music for piano and Violoncello (ECM
1819). That's a lot closer to 50% than 10%.
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
Come back in 20 years (the theme of this topic)
and do something with those formats. haha
Yeah, right. Good luck with that. Hope you
don't lose any bits (detection is worthless
without correction) even assuming you have
anything to decode the files.
H [Sat, 12 May 2007 16:24:52 -0600]:
>In any case, using 7zip's .zip implementation you can...
--
40th Floor - Software [ at ] http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com iPlay advanced audio player
zircon.40th.com Zircon mobile music player
|
|
On Sun, 13 May 2007 10:09:54 -0700, hel[ at ]40th.com wrote:
[Quoted Text] > Come back in 20 years (the theme of this topic)
> and do something with those formats. haha
> Yeah, right. Good luck with that. Hope you
> don't lose any bits (detection is worthless
> without correction) even assuming you have
> anything to decode the files.
Classic. When someone provides evidence that you're wrong, instead of
acknowledging it you post more unfounded nonsense.
For data integrity: prudent people do backups and use RAID so that they
don't lose important data. CDs are not a failsafe backup strategy. I had
the first portable CD player Sony made. Most of my CDs from that era are
still playable but some are not.
For formats: open source means you have the source code. If you think
there will be no way to extract the PCM data from an open source archive
containing WAV files in twenty years, I'll take that bet.
For whether the code will be usable: I was programming in Fortran and C
more than twenty years ago and in C++ eighteen years ago. You can still
get Fortran, C, C++ compilers last time I checked. Do you think C and C++
compilers will be unavailable in twenty years? If so, I'll take that bet
too.
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
H- [Mon, 14 May 2007 14:37:42 -0600]:
>Classic. When someone provides evidence that you're wrong, instead of
>acknowledging it you post more unfounded nonsense.
Don't be a jerk. No one was "wrong".
You appear to be jumping into this
with little background -- the guy
wanted to know what to use so he can
play his stuff in 20 years. I said,
put it on a CD (obviously CD-audio).
He could use FLAC, or something else,
sure, and get 50% average compression.
If a bit goes bad, the file is gone -
worthless. On a CD, it can be recovered,
and for free -- no effort involved.
Anyway, so a bleacher bum says, "FLAC
is pointless, I (he) gets as good with
zip". Right. Not even close, and even
if it could get as good compression,
there's still no correction: lose a
bit, the file is worthless. Zero point
to all that.
Then, here you are, jumping in at the
end, speaking not for youself but the
bleacher-bums. Haha, and all you can
say is "he (bleacher bum) isn't talking
about zip zip, he's talking about
(whatever)zip". Right, bleacher-bum
puppermaster, I'm sure you are 100%
right, as if that matters (it doesn't).
>Classic. When someone provides evidence that you're wrong, instead of
>acknowledging it you post more unfounded nonsense.
Right, this guy -- any one -- is going
to do all what you suggest for the
next 20 years. Haha. If he's smart,
he'll do what I suggested -- burn it
to a CD (audio) disc. Even an mp3
converted back to PCM will sound EXACTLY
the same as the mp3 does (no better, no
worse). If you can't/won't understand
how superior that is, you should stop
jumping up and down and think for a
few seconds. And if you want me to draw
you a picture of that so you can understand
why that is, just say so. I'll be happy
to help you, you confused wittle wabbit.
hah
--
40th Floor - Software [ at ] http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com iPlay advanced audio player
zircon.40th.com Zircon mobile music player
|
|
On Tue, 15 May 2007 09:45:32 -0700, hel[ at ]40th.com wrote:
[Quoted Text] > No one was "wrong".
You wrote: "The .zip idea is not that great since you can't get better
than about 10% with plain zip."
I got 20% compression with zip and reasonably close to FLAC with LZMA
(.7z). Therefore, you were wrong.
Since you can't understand that, there's no point trying to reason with
you.
--
Please read this before replying:
1. Dshow & posting help: http://tmhare.mvps.org/help.htm
2. Trim & respond inline (please don't top post or snip everything)
3. Benefit others: follow up if you are helped or you found a solution
|
|
H- [Tue, 15 May 2007 11:16:28 -0600]:
>You wrote: "The .zip idea is not that great since you can't get better
>than about 10% with plain zip."
Perfectly true for me, and I even showed the
results! (Somehow you managed to not include
that, besides not showing anything youself.
Anyway, as with any lossless codec, the
compression varies with complexity of the
source material. If you compress some wimpy
stuff, you get better compression, regardless
of the encoding scheme. I can lossless compress
silence and get 99% compression. Means nothing
.... and you're still a jerk, aha. The theme
of the thread was "what to use to play in 20
years". You can use your funky, "oh-look,-
I've-got-the-source-zipper-thing" if you want.
In 20 years? Nah, you'll have nothing in 20
years that you can find and use, let alone play.
I've got CDs older than you! aha
--
40th Floor - Software [ at ] http://40th.com/
iplay.40th.com iPlay advanced audio player
zircon.40th.com Zircon mobile music player
|
|
<hel[ at ]40th.com> wrote in message news:e0O40BxlHHA.1776[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] > H- [Mon, 14 May 2007 14:37:42 -0600]:
> >Classic. When someone provides evidence that you're wrong, instead of
> >acknowledging it you post more unfounded nonsense.
>
> Don't be a jerk. No one was "wrong".
> You appear to be jumping into this
> with little background -- the guy
> wanted to know what to use so he can
> play his stuff in 20 years. I said,
> put it on a CD (obviously CD-audio).
FYI, burned CDs may be a poor choice for long term data retention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD-R#Optimal_storage_conditions_and_expected_lifespan
|
|
On Wed, 16 May 2007 02:20:27 -0700, hel[ at ]40th.com wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I've got CDs older than you! aha
I have shoes older than your juvenile personality.
--
http://www.chrisnet.net/code.htm
[MS MVP for DirectShow / MediaFoundation]
|
|
|