Frage von nobody:
Hello,
I have a new DVD player and have gained extra beimkauf ensured that he can play SVCD's.
the test then the disappointment, some svcd's and some he does not play.
Now I ask, Is there svcd synonymous different formats or versions?? or what could be the problem??
Thank you in advance for your help!
Antwort von VolkerS:
Each SVCD is different, on the one hand is a feature film, on the other a music video .... :-)
Seriously:
For the SVCD format, there are specifications for bitrate, Framgrösse, audio rate etc.
If you now SVCDs (I hope I'm not stoned for the apostrophe) did not meet these requirements (especially the CD burner from Asia are there) specialists, it may be, of course, that your players to "compliant" and the files is other then not happening, or not recognize it as SVCD.
Antwort von beiti:
I have a new DVD player and have gained extra beimkauf ensured that he can play SVCD's.
the test then the disappointment, some svcd's and some he does not play. Does it purchased to SVCD or self-burned?
If advertises the player with fitness to SVCD, he has the damned duty, playing standard-compliant SVCDs. With homemade discs, it may be, however, that they do not fully correspond to the standard, then it must not be guilty of the player.
My old Pioneer (of which the Manufacturer but has never claimed that he could SVCD) can play SVCDs without menu easily, with such menu is not. Also because it can be.
SVCD's (I hope I'm not stoned) for the apostrophe But, will you, because before the plural-s time now belongs None (not even) in English. After the stoning You'll be drawn and quartered, because you have the apostrophe versächlicht. ;)
Antwort von Gast1:
The SVCD standard you find Ushi: http://www.edv-tipp.de/docs/einstiegsseite.htm
A software to control your SVCDs can be found here: http://www.tecoltd.com/bitratev.htm
The bitrate viewer you can see whether the SVCD is within the scope of the standards.
Antwort von VolkerS:
SVCD's (I hope I'm not stoned) for the apostrophe But, will you, because before the plural-s time now belongs None (not even) in English. After the stoning You'll be drawn and quartered, because you have the apostrophe versächlicht. :) [/ quote]
Shame on my grammar of low income head!
Antwort von Gast1:
Question s.den Experts (beiti): Does it "before the plural-S" or "before the plural-S"?
Antwort von beiti:
Question s.den Experts (beiti): Does it "before the plural-S" or "before the plural-S"? So I'm really an expert None. All the new spelling has been s.mir passed - but I did not know that something has changed in terms of an apostrophe.
In the above case, it depends on the context: "Before the plural apostrophe-S is not." or "Before the plural-S one should use an apostrophe."
The true expert is the way this one:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastian_Sick
Antwort von Gast1:
It therefore also means "before
the plural-S is one of ..."
Would you rather be stoned and quartered, or do you prefer "tars and feathers in front"? :-)
Antwort von beiti:
Hi, anonymous "gast1"!
None I'm aware of guilt, but let me clear up much. As I said, I'm no expert. To my knowledge, the letter S neuter. the "S" or "S" but can not be, so this leaves only the "S". If you have sources that prove the otherwise agreed, please show!
EDIT: I only just noticed that you clearly allude to my previous posting. Hmm. I would say this is a borderline case. ;)
No, seriously. I have read through the passage several times and I think that both are possible here. The question is whether the phrase refers to the letter S, or whether the place is meant in front of the S. You can say "I sit behind the house a lot." or "I sit behind the house a lot.". These are two slightly different meanings, but both are grammatically correct.
Antwort von VolkerS:
I think the spelling reform toll.
I write everything as before, synonymous, but it is now suddenly right :-))
Antwort von beiti:
I write everything as before, synonymous, but it is now suddenly right :-)) That's about the reform was indeed thought: Instead of teaching students how to do it right, we simply explain the spelling is correct, the students have been wrongly used.
Unfortunately it did not work for all students as well. Statistically, the error has since risen.
Antwort von VolkerS:
Statistically, the error has since risen. Even among the "newcomers" or only in the "newcomers"?
PS: I think so, some rules do not necessarily synonymous illuminating or "simple".
Antwort von beiti:
Increased the error rates of newcomers among the newcomers, they have fallen. (The latter, however, may come from the fact that often has both spellings were allowed.)
Antwort von Gast1:
@ Anonymous beiti
I wanted to kick-off point really does not umpteenth grammar discussion, but rather take you only a little on the shovel. Otherwise, it goes to me so that I know neither the old nor the new rules. From my perspective I write something wrong and would therefore never synonymous always understood :-)
By the way are currently 79 registered and 4 anonymous s.Board active. However, the registrants for me are just as anonymous as anonymous.
However, to a little less anonymous than many others to be here is a Picture of me:
:-)))
And to avoid misunderstanding: I would not synonymous new "Registered to Concurrent" sparking discussion. That would be synonymous unfair because "we" Concurrent seem clearly in the majority.
Antwort von beiti:
Should be synonymous not an attack on anonymity. (They are not subject to registration in all the forums in the majority. Register) But the advantage that you will be notified by email when answers come. Like now.
