In the October issue, MF says that CD's are analog, because the pits on the CD are analogs of the digital information and not the digital information itself. If that is so, then unless a machine records the actual one's and zero's the system is not digital, according to him, if I have not misunderstood what he wrote.
I know that the CD pits are not the exact 0's and 1's of the signal; it is a mathematically-transformed version of that signal. However the pits code that transformed signal in digital form. So why is it called analog by MF?
Some digital information systems intentionally add bits to the information so that data is quickly checked for writing accuracy. Does that make the data analog by MF's reasoning? I don't think so.
Maybe someone can clarify what digital vs. analog is, first for the CD medium referred to by MF, and then for other media. JA?
In the October issue, MF says that CD's are analog, because the pits on the CD are analogs of the digital information and not the digital information itself. If that is so, then unless a machine records the actual one's and zero's the system is not digital, according to him, if I have not misunderstood what he wrote.
I know that the CD pits are not the exact 0's and 1's of the signal; it is a mathematically-transformed version of that signal. However the pits code that transformed signal in digital form. So why is it called analog by MF?
Some digital information systems intentionally add bits to the information so that data is quickly checked for writing accuracy. Does that make the data analog by MF's reasoning? I don't think so.
Maybe someone can clarify what digital vs. analog is, first for the CD medium referred to by MF, and then for other media. JA?