![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 11/09/2011 10:04 AM, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I'm still having trouble finding any sellers that I've actually heard of...
You have to take a chance sometime. How much can you afford to lose?
And read the reviews.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 23:03:09 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> On 9/10/2011 11:37, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> It seems that the physical size wasn't 'standardised',
>
> I've seen square ones designed to substitute for business cards.
I've seen those as well.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:04:14 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> The size was standardised. That's why all tray-load CD drives have 2
> wells, one at 120mm and another at 80mm. A disk any other size wouldn't
> fit into the smaller well properly.
Well, Dr. Wikipedia disagrees with you.
;)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 11/09/2011 06:35 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:04:14 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
>> The size was standardised. That's why all tray-load CD drives have 2
>> wells, one at 120mm and another at 80mm. A disk any other size wouldn't
>> fit into the smaller well properly.
>
> Well, Dr. Wikipedia disagrees with you.
>
> ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_cd
"Since the mid 1990s, all tray loading players have wells for the CD3."
Unless you're saying it wasn't standardised, in which case
"When Mini CDs were first introduced in the United States, they were
initially marketed as CD3, in reference to their approximate size in
inches; larger CDs were called CD5, despite the fact that both CD
specifications are defined solely in terms of metric units."
The phrase "both CD specifications" seems to indicate that there's an
official specification for the mini-CD standard.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Le 2011/09/10 14:37, Jim Henderson a écrit :
>> Where on that list can you see 8cm CDs?
>
> Try doing a search for "Mini CD" rather than "8cm CD". You'll probably
> get more results. It seems that the physical size wasn't 'standardised',
> and they range in size from 2.4" to 3.1".
>
> I found:
>
> http://www.google.com/products/catalog?
>
hl=en&safe=off&biw=1280&bih=886&gs_upl=3319l3319l0l3998l1l1l0l0l0l0l236l236l2-1l1l0&q=
> %22mini+cd%
>
22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=13310235017043927419&sa=X&ei=Dq5rTqH3HKrjiAKqpKStDg&ved=0CIwBEPMCMAA
>
> for example. $26 for a spindle of 100 of them.
>
> Jim
In my area, for a bit under that price, I get a spindle of 100 DVD-R,
DVD+R or 100 CDR.
So, if the mini CDs are the same price or higher than regular CDs, why
bother?
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:07:38 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> On 11/09/2011 06:35 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:04:14 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>
>>> The size was standardised. That's why all tray-load CD drives have 2
>>> wells, one at 120mm and another at 80mm. A disk any other size
>>> wouldn't fit into the smaller well properly.
>>
>> Well, Dr. Wikipedia disagrees with you.
>>
>> ;)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_cd
>
> "Since the mid 1990s, all tray loading players have wells for the CD3."
>
>
>
> Unless you're saying it wasn't standardised, in which case
>
> "When Mini CDs were first introduced in the United States, they were
> initially marketed as CD3, in reference to their approximate size in
> inches; larger CDs were called CD5, despite the fact that both CD
> specifications are defined solely in terms of metric units."
>
> The phrase "both CD specifications" seems to indicate that there's an
> official specification for the mini-CD standard.
I guess it wasn't Dr. Wikipedia, now where *did* I see that....?
Ah, yes, the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 18:04:16 -0400, Alain wrote:
> In my area, for a bit under that price, I get a spindle of 100 DVD-R,
> DVD+R or 100 CDR.
> So, if the mini CDs are the same price or higher than regular CDs, why
> bother?
I'm not the one looking for them. I would guess if someone wanted that
specific form factor for some reason, they'd spend the money for them.
Perhaps someone with a mini CD audio player.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 11/09/2011 11:04 PM, Alain wrote:
> So, if the mini CDs are the same price or higher than regular CDs, why
> bother?
I guess it just seems somehow "wasteful" to me to use an entire 80
minute disk to store one 2-minute track, that's all. You're probably
right about there being no price advantage. Presumably "most people"
want to buy a disk that holds the maximum possible amount of data (which
is why mini-CD is so hard to find in the first place, and probably why
they get made in smaller quantities and so cost more).
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Am 12.09.2011 06:55, schrieb Jim Henderson:
>>>> The size was standardised. That's why all tray-load CD drives have 2
>>>> wells, one at 120mm and another at 80mm. A disk any other size
>>>> wouldn't fit into the smaller well properly.
>>>
>>> Well, Dr. Wikipedia disagrees with you.
...
> Ah, yes, the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc
Read more carefully, particularly this section:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc#Disc_shapes_and_diameters
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 12:05:27 +0200, clipka wrote:
> Am 12.09.2011 06:55, schrieb Jim Henderson:
>
>>>>> The size was standardised. That's why all tray-load CD drives have 2
>>>>> wells, one at 120mm and another at 80mm. A disk any other size
>>>>> wouldn't fit into the smaller well properly.
>>>>
>>>> Well, Dr. Wikipedia disagrees with you.
> ...
>> Ah, yes, the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc
>
> Read more carefully, particularly this section:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc#Disc_shapes_and_diameters
I was looking at the second paragraph, which states that they have varied
in size.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |