SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : e.Digital Corporation(EDIG) - Embedded Digital Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: PartyTime who wrote (9885)1/26/2000 3:19:00 PM
From: who cares?  Read Replies (6) | Respond to of 18366
 
>>>"...many companies already had prototype players based on the microdrive and they don't need the EDIG OS to do it, they just whip their own out. Hell it's just another IDE drive, you can probably find the code to do it for free on the net."<<<
1) Which companies?
2) What do you mean by "probably?" and how would this compare to EDIG's multi-codec capability?
3) And how does doing it "free on the net" comply with copyright protection?
4) Why is MP3 being sued?
5) Why is the SDMI seeking a standards solution?


Ok picker of nits.

1. Read my original post, "There I saw the infamous "hockey puck" MP3 player from EDIG, but I also saw MicroDrive-equipped Diamond Rio's, Han-Go Personal Jukeboxes, and a Creative Nomad. That convinced me, even more, that EDIG has nothing special."

2. By "probably" I mean that I haven't taken the time to find it but considering IDE drives have been out over ten years, and made in thousands of models, I don't think it's a stretch to say that finding code to make one work would be that difficult. In fact back over a year ago I was on a mailing list where a guy was writing from scratch, code to make an IDE mp3 player. He was going to sell a kit that you plug your IDE drive into. All it was was a little code, an LCD display, a $15 mp3 chip(yes theirs a hardware mp2 mp3 decoder chip) a DSP to change it to analog, and a headphone level amplifier.
The dude got it to work, but never got a production unit going as the Rio's and Nomad's started showing up.

3. What copyright? They don't have a copyright for talking to a harddrive. Anyone can write software that reads from a hard drive.

4. I assume you mean MP3.com, I believe they are being sued for copyright infringement. And that has what to do with EDIG? Maybe you are confusing patents and copyrights and think anyone that makes a disk based mp3 player will be sued. Ehhhh, wrong. Like I posted, other people are already able to use the microdrive without this micro os. How, because it's no big thang.
5. SDMI is seeking a standard solution so that they can control it and hopefully not have the music industry turned upside down. The music biz is about 50 levels deep with middle men that can all be cut out by the internet and it scares them to death.

Something you guys don't seem to get is the reason no one else has an all in one wonder codec player isn't because it's hard to do, it is not, it's because no one wants it. If they ever get a final standard then many will do that and always mp3. Here's the deal kids, if they make the baddest most incredible watermarked double secret encrypted format of all time, it just doesn't matter. All of us have good ol analog ears. At some point the super encrypted data gets decoded with whatever codec is settled on. At that point it's pure digital, some smart hacker type will find a way to record that pure digital content. Then he recompress it into mp3 and lets all of his friends copy it. If not then lets go one more step down the line, the signal goes through a DSP and is transformed to analog. At that point it can definately be captured and recompressed as an mp3 and pirated. No way to stop it. There is little little loss in sound quality for one generation of expansion and recompression, especially since people are using higher bitrates all the time.

PS,
Not ducking your message by a longshot, just took a little longer.



To: PartyTime who wrote (9885)1/26/2000 3:52:00 PM
From: Pluvia  Respond to of 18366