Agreed (FWIW ;-) Admittedly there are many alternate sources out there for information (and misinformation) about relatively 'modern' systems, but there's also a lot of informed, reliable and, dare I say, mature folks here with much to contribute; it'd be a shame not to take advantage of their experience, regardless of the age of the issue in question.
m On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:33 PM Tony Jones via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Traffic on the list is so low I'm not seeing the issue. I'm also not > seeing complaints about threads being off topic. Seems like solution > seeking a problem. > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 8:28 PM Chris via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2022, 11:11:27 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk < > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > I was not disagreeing with you. > > > > > > Ok. Wonderful. I guess we've sufficiently established that from > henceforth > > anything dang-old is totally on topic. Any detractors? :) > > > > Transcoding as in vcr to mpegs? I wasn't suggesting XP was utterly > > entirely useless. Video editing in a modern sense requires loads of > > processing h.p. to be efficient. And no transcodimg is necessary. > Certainly > > not an expert. But I should think older hardware would be very very slow. >
