khen lim wrote:
> True - can't fault what you said. Still doesn't nullify the fact that after
> all these years of uber-technology in all things surrounding life, we're
> still left with messy cables everywhere, that attract dust and makes things
> dirty at the back of systems.
>
> With audiophile standard systems, I can understand the reluctance to
> compromise. I have a studio setup here that runs enough cables to go around
> the globe (just kidding - but you get the idea) and some of these are
> attenuating cables worth thousands of dollars on their own.
>
> But I don't see the same concern about audio quality when it comes to the
> personal computer or printer or mouse or graphic display or ext HDD etc. Or
> do you think the same level of degradation will also occur in the computing
> environment that will cause us some grief?
>
I agree - that's a different animal. At some point, though, I think you
run the risk of RF congestion in the home - right now, there are already
instances of 2.4GHz cordless phones that interfere with wifi signals.
When you start filing the house with wifi and bluetooth and wireless
phones, at some point you do get signal degradation and interference.
Now, since it's all just a digital data stream, error correction can
cover some of it, and you should get the jpeg data you see on your
screen flown over to your printer. But you get the same effect with
cell phones at a convention - RF density gets so high that nothing
really works right.
--
Paul Braun
Valparaiso, IN
"It's such a fine line between stupid, and clever." - David St. Hubbins
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon
"The Fountain of Youth is a state of mind." - The Ides of March
"Music washes from the soul the dust of everyday life" - Harlan Howard
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|