Laserdisc to Win 7 or Mac - help and recommendations please

[Spiny Norman]

LD was, and remains, an ANALOG-ONLY format. As such, it is impossible to import/export/interact with a PC (then, or now). The PCs as cited were just glorified remote controls.

At the deepest level, LD is a matter of 1s and 0s so it can't be all analog. However, the rest of the statement is very true.

So cornutopia is right about that, it's no practical help whatsoever, it's just trivia but no real solution.
Still, trivia can be very interesting, so there's nothing wrong with that. After all, threads aren't about winning or losing, unless it is that you win if you learn something.

[Cornucopia]

@2BDecided, Yes, that code could have been (and probably was) included in along with the positional & metadata code, stored in the adjacent audio track's place. But that would still entail boot code residing in the microcontroller (otherwise EVERY LD player/system could have run that disc, which is not true), and then the microcontroller "downloaded" the bulk/main program code from the LD's track. It probably resided in the first few frames' worth to make it easier to seek. So that portion could be considered digital-encapsulated-in-analog. But that's all. ALL THE MEDIA (audio*, video, stills) were analog.

@SpineyNorman, at the deepest level LD is a matter of binary pits & lands, but ought more properly to be called something like BINARY analog, not digital. Digital is a representation of the INFORMATION signal USING digital code (e.g. 1 & 0). In LD's case, the binary states are the "carrier signal" (like FM does) and their existence carries NO information: the information is carried in the Analog modulation (pulse width in LD's case, FM in FM's case).

Scott

*not counting the later-added PCM & DD/DTS audio tracks.

[Spiny Norman]

Out of interest, how is that different from a CD which was develloped around the same time? Or should I see it as a sort of morse code, or a coaxial signal perhaps?
Well, of course the CD is actually younger than the LD in some ways, as far as I was told, so that might support your story.

(Meanwhile, I suggest you fire your sidekick for incompetence, and find a new one.)

[Cornucopia]

The original spec for LD came out in 1978. The original spec for Audio CD came out in 1982. Much of the technology in LD was utilized in the design of the CD (laser pickup/reader, polycarbonate substrate, internal aluminized layers, outward spiral, CLV, pits+lands...), though not all. IOW, it is an (indirect) offshoot.

For someone who is such a promoter of LD, you don't seem to know your LD history very well.
It also sounds like you don't understand PWM, or perhaps modulation in general.

From answers.com:

What is the difference between analog pulse modulation and digital pulse modulation?

Analog Pulse modulation is discreet in time but the formation is transmitted in continuous form. In digital pulse modulation, not only the time axis is discreet but the information is also in digital form. Examples of Analog PM are PAM and PTM i.e pulse amplitude and pulse time modulations respectively. Examples of Digital PM are PCM and PDM i.e pulse code and pulse delta modulations respectively.

PWM can be either analog or digital. As it appears in LD, it is analog. CD is NOT PWM (analog or digital), it is digital Pulse-CODE-Modulation (or PCM).

Scott

[Spiny Norman]

Yeah, I ask questions when I don't know stuff. I find that very useful. Some people mistake it for a weakness, but the joke's on them, innit.

Hm, but I was basically right then, about it predating the CD.

I may perhaps annoy you further by "promoting" yet another weird old laserdisc dinosaur, namely Edit Droid...

[Cornucopia]

CD which was develloped around the same time

I was basically right then, about it predating the CD

Funny how your sense of time warps to your own advantage.

Don't know how you'd "promote" EditDroid, seeing as how it is both proprietary (and you don't own the copyright on it, probably haven't ever even used it) and defunct & superceded (every NLE on the market is both more responsive, fuller featured, greater capacity, higher resolution and much less expensive). It was important in its day as a precursor and stepping stone to current products (thank you, AVID!!), but it's now a museum timeline piece just like the CMX-300 and the Steenbeck (although that one is occasionally still in use).
But if you're going to butcher the facts as much as you have already, don't bother...

Scott

[Baldrick]

I win. THread cleaned.

[Spiny Norman]

Fine, but I still don't think someone called Baldrick should take offense at a Blackadder reference even if it IS about dung. If I registered as Eric Cartman I'd bloody well expect someone to call me "fatass" before long.

[usually_quiet]

It is unlikely that Baldric was offended by your joke. Review the forum rules in their entirety and you can probably figure out why some posts were removed.

[Spiny Norman]

It is unlikely that Baldric was offended by your joke. Review the forum rules in their entirety and you can probably figure out why some posts were removed.

Well redwudz was, he cited it. No room for misunderstanding there, unless I can't say "militant creationist" but that doesn't seem likely.

Apart from that I think 'figuring it out for yourself' is not a good idea in a case like this, because assumptions should be avoided, and I have yet to see forum rules that do not leave any room for interpretation.

[usually_quiet]

unless I can't say "*********" but that doesn't seem likely.

That actually would be more of a problem here.

[El Heggunte]

VideoHelp is not a good place for trolling. If someone feels like trolling,
then they'd better go to trolling sites such as Yahoo! Answers or Quora.

[Spiny Norman]

Yeah, but to whom does that apply, is the question. I'd ask you to read the whole thread and a similar one if it wasn't basically a waste of your time.

unless I can't say "*********" but that doesn't seem likely.

That actually would be more of a problem here.

That's a joke, right? Because if not, them I'm really getting confused.

Anyway I'm guessing the other mod simply didn't see through the reference because he did not know Blackadder. Well no-one's perfect.

[usually_quiet]

No, it's not a joke. If your intent is to take this thread back down a path that is likely to result in more deleted posts, be my guest.

[Spiny Norman]

No, it's not a joke. If your intent is to take this thread back down a path that is likely to result in more deleted posts, be my guest.

Well no. I see that risk in continuing the conversation, and we are going hugely off topic also.
But I honestly don't see the problem with those two words. What's wrong with saying (in other words) "vigorous supporter of a religious aetiology"? Does the issue perhaps have a history here that I'm not aware of?

[Baldrick]

Please discuss that somewhere else. NOT in this thread.

[Spiny Norman]

Please discuss that somewhere else. NOT in this thread.

Or even better, never again. I can live with not understanding most of what was said here and why. Bringing it up in a new thread seems like a really bad idea, I think we can all agree on that.

Anyway, the OP was already answered I think?