Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Seems like this is a war not worth winning (Score 1) 470

by conigs (#21964684) Attached to: Paramount to Drop HD DVD?

Contrary to what some people say, DVD isn't "good enough" to show a movie the way it was meant to be seen. BluRay is.

That is until you see footage at 4k (either native digital capture or scan from film). Resolution will keep getting bumped more and more. But generally your right, in that eventually it really won't matter.


+ - Why the hate for database music management?

Submitted by
conigs writes "One of the things we as geeks often champion is a database file system. We tend to agree that it would offer much more freedom over the antiquated file-folder paradigm. Our files are digital; they can live anywhere. Why should they be limited to existing in one folder/directory (saved searched/aliases/shortcuts/links aside)? If we acknowledge the advantages of a database file system, why do so many people rally against a database music/media library? Music already has a plethora of metadata associated with it, making flexible, on the fly organization possible. Why limit its organization to a rigid folder hierarchy? This issue tends to come about often when discussing iTunes/iPod and how so many people just want to drag their music from their file system and not be bothered by the database.

The general complaints about Apple/iTunes/iPods aside, what do people have against a database music library?"

The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes.