• MudMan@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Oh, no. It was not.

      The smallest standard for CDs was 63 minutes and 550-ish MB. For most of the life of the medium you’d mostly get the 74 min, 650MB one. The stretch 700 and up standards were fairly late-day. I tend to default to 500 in my head because it was a decent way to figure out how many discs you’d need to store a few gigs of data back in the day, though, not because I spent more time with the 63 min CDs.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The smallest standard for CDs was 63 minutes and 550-ish MB

        I think I came along around 2 years after burners were commercially available, so I never saw that. And the 700 MB discs came along very shortly later. So I never had a concept of a 550 MB CD (btw you said 500 MB). This is the first I’ve heard of it.

        • MudMan@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          It did exist, I promise. But again, I just default to 500 because it was such common shorthand to think about it in terms of needing two discs to store a gig. And to this day I still have 650 CDs laying around, even when 700MB ones were available they were both around at once.

          I think some of the mismatch may also be that you’re thinking about it in terms of storage only (i.e. CD-Rs) because of your age and I’m probably a bit older and was mostly talking about them as read-only media. It was years between the first CDs in the late 80s and writers being widespread at all, assuming whatever game or application that came in a single CD was going to take 500 meg-ish to duplicate or install was, again, pretty useful.

          In any case, this is obsolete trivia. The point is we went from games being tens of megs to hundreds of megs overnight, and we were all extremely pleased about it.

          • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            You really seem to be misremembering again, since the original CD spec could hold 650 MiB of data.

            • MudMan@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              You are half right. I am misremembering 63min being the original standard of the red book audio CD, that was 650 already, although apparently 63 min CDs were used for audio mastering at some point? Info about that is sparse. As a side note, man, modern search engines suuuck.

              Anyway, 63min/550MB was the low capacity standard of the CD-R instead.

              People are aware of them, but man, it took me a while to find a contemporary technical reference to it being available. I ended up having to pull it from the Wayback Machine:
              https://web.archive.org/web/20070110232445/http://www.mscience.com/faq55.html

              And also this, from a eBay auction selling a box and labelling them “incredibly rare”, which apparently is accurate. I came just shy of digging through my pile of old CDs to see if I have any left. I may still do that next time I have them on hand.

                • MudMan@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  No, I’m… correcting myself. That’s how correcting a statement works, you make a new statement. Read my previous comment carefully.