----- Original Message -----
From me:
> speed measurement alone cannot be definitively provided. But
obviously, hardware solutions are faster than software ones, by their
very nature.
On Dec 9, 2011, at 9:43 AM, bouke wrote:
> This makes no sense whatsoever.
> Let me give you a very simple example. A 'black box' audio
compressor/limiter works 'realtime'.
> Now we all know that the same task can be done in a computer app.
way faster...
I now say:
First of all, I never disagreed with you, but we're getting into some
deep semantics here. In your example, a 'black box' audio compressor/
limiter working in 'realtime' vs a software solution processing the
same audio material, the result from the software solution would not
actually be faster because the audio in the hardware-processed version
is being used IMMEDIATELY (input to output), whereas the software-
processed version would produce a file that could THEN be used in real
time. So even if the software solution is able to process the audio
faster than realtime, it cannot be USED any faster than the hardware
solution. In fact, it most likely will be used later than a hardware
solution. That's what I meant by 'by their very nature'. To explain
further, even if there was a software device that was used IN THE SAME
WAY as a hardware device (input to output) and it was able to process
audio 'faster' than real time, it would be NO FASTER in actual use.
It can't because that's REAL TIME, input to output.
Despite this, the original discussion as I understood it was about
the QUALITY differences of software vs hardware standards/format
conversions, not about which one was faster.
Dennis Degan, Video Editor-Consultant-Knowledge Bank
NBC Today Show, New York
No comments:
Post a Comment