<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Obsolete Blog &#187; Electronics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://obsoleteblog.com/tag/electronics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://obsoleteblog.com</link>
	<description>What Ever Happened To....</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 04:40:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Laser Disc Players, You Had a Good Run</title>
		<link>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/10/laser-disc-players-you-had-a-good-run/</link>
		<comments>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/10/laser-disc-players-you-had-a-good-run/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:14:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Electronics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dvd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laser disc player]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laserdisc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pioneer laser disc]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://obsoleteblog.com/?p=51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Laserdisc was doomed when DVD made its debut. The smaller disc was—well, smaller, and it offered better resolution (even though standard-def) and accommodated Dolby Digital and DTS from day one.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Originally known as DiscoVision and LaserVision, the 12-inch optical videodisc format was developed by MCA and</p>
<div id="attachment_53" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/pioneer_laser_disc_player_obsoleteblog1.jpg" rel="lightbox[51]"><img class="size-thumbnail wp-image-53 " title="Pionner Laserdisc Player" src="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/pioneer_laser_disc_player_obsoleteblog1-150x150.jpg" alt="Laser disc Player" width="150" height="150" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Laser disc Player</p></div>
<p>Philips. The first consumer player wore the Magnavox logo, though Pioneer eventually became the format&#8217;s champion, giving it the proprietary name LaserDisc, which became the generic format name laserdisc.</p>
<p>Laserdisc output an analog NTSC signal, and is therefore as obsolete as the doomed analog broadcast standard. It was never a high-def format. There were two subformats, the higher-quality CAV, which held 30 minutes per side, and the more capacious and prevalent CLV, which held an hour per side. Two-hour, two-sided discs in CLV became the norm. Most discs were released with audio in a pretty decent two-channel FM-carrier format, which carried matrixed Dolby Surround, and was eventually upgraded to PCM digital. This allowed LD/CD combi players to be marketed. In the format&#8217;s waning years, Dolby Digital and DTS were added.</p>
<p>The laserdisc won a three-way format war with two other major disc formats, both of which, incredibly, were stylus-read like an LP. CED was invented and promoted by RCA, then an independent company, and the loss of the format war—along with tens of millions of dollars—was a major factor in turning RCA from an independent company to a TV brand that got passed around like a shopping bag. There was also a VHD format from JVC, which also went nowhere, but did so less expensively. Laserdisc won because consumers perceived greater performance and value in an optical-disc format.</p>
<p>There was a time when having a laserdisc player and library was synonymous with being a videophile. Considering the alternatives, it was the best choice. Its more than 400 lines of horizontal resolution were better than either VHS or</p>
<div id="attachment_54" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/laser_disc_vs_dvd_obsoleteblog.jpg" rel="lightbox[51]"><img class="size-thumbnail wp-image-54 " title="12&quot; Laserdisc vs DVD" src="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/laser_disc_vs_dvd_obsoleteblog-150x150.jpg" alt="Laserdisc vs DVD" width="150" height="150" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Laserdisc vs DVD</p></div>
<p>Beta, at 250 each, and also beat the 300 lines of broadcast TV. There was a Super VHS format boasting more than 400 lines, but it recorded only the brightness signal at that resolution,<br />
smeary compared to laserdisc.</p>
<p>Laserdisc was doomed when DVD made its debut. The smaller disc was—well, smaller, and it offered better resolution (even though standard-def) and accommodated Dolby Digital and DTS from day one. Even now, the DVD shows signs of holding on in the face of competition from the genuinely superior Blu-ray, which supports HD, lossless surround, and other good stuff. But no one knows how long it will take for DVD to go the way of laserdisc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/10/laser-disc-players-you-had-a-good-run/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No More Rockin&#8217; Out with Your Boombox</title>
		<link>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/08/no-more-rockin-out-with-your-boombox/</link>
		<comments>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/08/no-more-rockin-out-with-your-boombox/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 05:19:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Music Stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boombox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electronics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[old radios]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[portable music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sony boombox]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://obsoleteblog.com/?p=26</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Boomboxes were all the rage during the 80s however they are all but gone today.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_27" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/boombox_obsoleteblog.jpg" rel="lightbox[26]"><img class="size-thumbnail wp-image-27 " title="Sony Boombox from the 80s" src="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/boombox_obsoleteblog-150x150.jpg" alt="Old Sony Boombox" width="150" height="150" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Old Boombox</p></div>
<p>Your iPod may look cool, but can you balance it on your shoulder and blast your new Jay-Z album at obnoxiously high volumes? Didn&#8217;t think so. The boombox — also known as the jambox, the ghetto blaster or the jerkface apparatus — reached its peak popularity during the 1980s, when big hair, stone-washed jeans and bad dancing enjoyed similarly unaccountable heydays. Though updated editions of the boombox may be on the market today, the era of not being able to ride in peace on a randomly selected public conveyance on a randomly selected day is, thankfully, behind us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/08/no-more-rockin-out-with-your-boombox/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Good Old Dot Matrix Printer</title>
		<link>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/07/the-good-old-dot-matrix-printer/</link>
		<comments>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/07/the-good-old-dot-matrix-printer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 04:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computer stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dot matrix printer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electronics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[inkjet printer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obsolete printer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[old printers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[printers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://obsoleteblog.com/?p=19</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dot matrix printers were the standard for almost 2 decades before they were replaced by much better inkjets.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Removing the perforated leader strips from continuous-feed paper printouts was fun huh?</p>
<div id="attachment_20" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/dot_matrix_obsoleteblog.jpg" rel="lightbox[19]"><img class="size-thumbnail wp-image-20    " title="Epson Dot Matrix Printer" src="http://obsoleteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/dot_matrix_obsoleteblog-150x150.jpg" alt="Obsolete Dot Matrix Printer" width="150" height="150" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Obsolete Dot Matrix Printer</p></div>
<p>Developed in the 1970s, the dot matrix printer delivered low-quality printouts for nearly two whole decades before inkjet printers offered an alternative that was slightly less hard on the eyes. The dot matrix printer will be remembered for its frequent paper jams; for its slow, noisy operation; and for the thin strips of perforated paper that you had to tear (carefully, so you didn&#8217;t end up with a document that looked as though it had come too close to a paper shredder) off the left and right sides of a printout once their work of keeping the paper properly aligned in the printer was done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://obsoleteblog.com/2009/11/07/the-good-old-dot-matrix-printer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
