<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">]>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.blogcadre.com">
<channel>
 <title>BlogCadre - hd</title>
 <link>http://www.blogcadre.com/tag/hd</link>
 <description></description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Upgrading the 4th gen iPod HD &amp; battery for Rockbox, FLAC</title>
 <link>http://www.blogcadre.com/blog/justin/upgrading_the_4th_gen_ipod_hd_battery_for_rockbox_flac_2007_04_06_15_27_12</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Kill your iPod (part II).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When it comes to audiophiles all is but lost.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With the advent of MP3, the idea of lossless audio seemed to have fallen upon deaf ears.  Enter: FLAC, the Free Lossless Audio Codec, it compresses waveforms by finding similarities (like bzip), not by changing the the waveform itself (mp3 et. al.).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When it comes to playing FLAC on a portable, a HD based one is the only way to go because of the increased size of FLAC files -- roughly 1/2 the size of the original uncompressed stream.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://flac.sourceforge.net/links.html#hardware&quot;&gt;FLAC players are listed on the FLAC website&lt;/a&gt;, but as far as I see it there are only two choices for gapless MP3 and FLAC playback:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul &gt;
&lt;li &gt;Rio Karma -- purchase from &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.karmalimbo.com/&quot;&gt;Karma Limbo&lt;/a&gt;, his are &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.karmalimbo.com/catalog.htm&quot;&gt;pre-hacked with upgrades&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li &gt;a Rockbox enabled device such as iRiver, or iPod&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/908">battery</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/1391">emi</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/1359">flac</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/1390">hard drive</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/625">hd</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/462">iPod</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/344">mp3</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:27:12 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>MythTV &amp; High Definition...minimum requirements</title>
 <link>http://www.blogcadre.com/blog/justin/mythtv_high_definition_minimum_requirements_2006_12_02_21_13_05</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.blogcadre.com/images/justin/polar_express_jpg_2006_12_02_20_29_33?size=_original&quot;&gt;&lt;img class=&quot;imageleft&quot; src=&quot;files/images/polar_express.thumbnail.jpg&quot; width=&quot;149&quot; height=&quot;84&quot; alt=&quot;Polar Express 720p Frame&quot;&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong &gt;Why have you forsaken me?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;My MythTV box has been chugging along nicely, playing DVDs and recording two shows off of a 2-tuner standard definition hardware MPEG encoder card (doing all at once).  Just before Thanksgiving, I purchased a projector that can do 720p and had been enjoying the finer detail of my DVDs at full resolution.  However, standard definition material &lt;i &gt;really&lt;/i&gt; looks like crap when displayed on a 69&quot; screen.  Enter: High Definition.  I bought a HDTV tuner card, thinking that I had prepared myself for this moment.  According to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://mythtv.org/docs/mythtv-HOWTO-3.html#ss3.1&quot;&gt;MythTV documentation&lt;/a&gt;, the minimum recommended processor speed for recording and playing off of one HD Tuner card is about 2.4GHz.  So I built my box with an Athlon XP 2800+ (2083MHz clock speed) thinking it would be up to the task.  Think again...&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/625">hd</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/626">high definition</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/1186">MythTV</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:13:05 -0600</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>When Marketing Goes Bad</title>
 <link>http://www.blogcadre.com/blog/mattcraigschultz/when_marketing_goes_bad_2006_01_28_22_50_29</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I was watching the television today, and I saw the most idiotic commercial ever. The commercial was for a pair of HD Sunglasses. Let&#039;s look at that acronymn HD for a second: H=high, D=definition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;img class=&quot;image&quot; src=&quot;files/images/Stupid.thumbnail.jpg&quot; width=&quot;150&quot; height=&quot;100&quot; alt=&quot;HD Sunglasses&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Now, why is this stupid? Maybe only someone with knowledge of what the term HD really means would think this is ridiculous. What is HD? High definition is a term associated to television or video broadcasts or files that are of a resolution higher than that of NTSC or PAL standards. Since real life optics have no pixel-by-pixel resolution, this makes no sense.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;!--
&lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#&quot; xmlns:dc=&quot;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/&quot; xmlns:trackback=&quot;http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/&quot;&gt;
&lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;http://www.blogcadre.com/blog/mattcraigschultz/when_marketing_goes_bad_2006_01_28_22_50_29&quot; dc:identifier=&quot;http://www.blogcadre.com/blog/mattcraigschultz/when_marketing_goes_bad_2006_01_28_22_50_29&quot; dc:title=&quot;When Marketing Goes Bad&quot; trackback:ping=&quot;http://www.blogcadre.com/trackback/925&quot; /&gt;
&lt;/rdf:RDF&gt;
--&gt;

</description>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/625">hd</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/626">high definition</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/627">ridiculous</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/622">stupid</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/624">sunglasses</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:50:29 -0600</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>HD Sunglasses</title>
 <link>http://www.blogcadre.com/images/mattcraigschultz/hd_sunglasses_2006_01_28_22_49_10</link>
 <description>&lt;a href=&quot;images/mattcraigschultz/hd_sunglasses_2006_01_28_22_49_10&quot; &gt;&lt;span class=&quot;image thumbnail&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.blogcadre.com/files/images/Stupid.thumbnail.jpg&quot; width=&quot;150&quot; height=&quot;100&quot;   alt=&quot;HD Sunglasses&quot; title=&quot;HD Sunglasses&quot; /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;A pair of HD Sunglasses, as the company calls them. Worthless crap is what I call them.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/625">hd</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/626">high definition</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/623">rediculous</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/622">stupid</category>
 <category domain="http://www.blogcadre.com/taxonomy/term/624">sunglasses</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:49:10 -0600</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
