maryte wrote: 
New software is...not worth whatever we paid for it. The old program we had on the old computer was quicker and less buggy. AND I could do more on it.

 dionysius wrote: 

So you kicked the new software's butt?

Discs for our podlings are done and labelled and are awaiting mailing, at last. I hope everyone thinks our effort is worth the wait.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
Cute! I'm glad NAF came up with the name!

 Alexandra wrote: 
do you know that kid's story, Wilhelmina the Whale? 

my favorite line as she chances upon some kids washed out to sea..

"I've lost my pod!"

  I love the way calling you my podmate makes me feel like we're all whales. 

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
Awwww......that was really sweet. Ditto back at ya!

 Alexandra wrote: 
You'll always be my podmate Alexandra.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 

Disregard that last post.....I was thinking that January was the beginning of our new pods, but it's February! So I'm still your podmate for the rest of the month.

Hi Alex,
I just downsized the selection and burnt them onto an audio CD and finished the label.. Posting tomorrow!!

 Lazy8 wrote: 

Oh, okay. Nevermind, NoEnz! We aren't in the same pod anymore, either.....

 hippiechick wrote: 
Fixed. Thanks, D.

 jagdriver wrote: 
Your link doesn't work. I think you spelled dreaming wrong.

 Welly wrote: 
Indeed. Use a data disc, but burn it as an "audio CD."

I've posted free download details for my Escribere Especial mix (as a single MP3) on my website, where I also posted the accompanying project art. Enjoy!

 jagdriver wrote: 
Aha!

Okay so remind me again - I can use plain old data discs. Is that correct? I'm getting ready to burn discs for my pod and am very frustrated with the 82 minute capacity of the music CDs.

 Coaxial wrote: 
I spewed forth about this several weeks ago.

 Coaxial wrote: 
Oops!    Hmmm I wonder who it was then? 

 Welly wrote: 
Coaxial is correct about the difference.  Discs are basically discs.  Re recordable and rewritable discs are different and most CD players will not recognize them.  I use the cheapest discs I can find for making test burns for playing my remasters, but when I want a good, durable copy, I use black discs.  Not sure about their properties, but they always play and they are the most resistant to damage and scratching.

All a disc is is a layer of metal foil in a polycarbonate (lexan) sandwhich.  Same material used in eyeglass lenses.  Its all about the scratch coat.  Poly is translucent at best without that coating.  The scratch coating  fuctions like keeping the material "wet" permanently.  When you dip a piece of glass that has been washed up at the beach into water, it becomes clear again and you can see through it.  The black discs seem to have made the poly less dependent on the scratch coating by what ever is added to make them black.

If it wasn't for the computer industry and the popularity of CD's, poly eyeglass lenses would still be in the stone age and of dubious quality.  The quality and clarity has greatly improved due to the demand of laser optics.  We can thank the music industry for better eyeglass lenses.  Who knew ?
Edit:  If it wasn't coaxial, someone was right.   

A new urban legend ?

 Welly wrote:  
Wasn't me ma'am....

 Lazy8 wrote: 
oh, were we? oops.  ok CD audio then, 2 discs.  :red-face:

ah penny drops.. that's what Randy was talking about. i was indeed talking about the disc format.