More Americans watch TV and surf the Internet simultaneously

AdventurSum said:
that's too funny... i've been conciously investing a few hours on the wkends to ripping cds and backing them up on a hard drive. i have too many boxes of digital media just taking up space. it's not like i throw a cd in for old times sake like when playing vinyl on a turntable. as i get a new set of 50 cds converted to mp3 and verified, i just chuck em.

for some reason though, i still maintain and cherish my ol skool cd binder with the bare essentials. lol

case-logic-cd-wallet-binder.png
Click to expand...

I just bought a hard drive just for that purpose (pics and music) , but I havent gotten around to it yet. Im too paranoid to chuck the CD's until I have them backed up.
I still have about 400 vinyl records in Sweden that I wanna get over here. Some stuff just sounds right w static and stuff:-)

I do have three CD binders in my car, but I mostly listen to XM "the joint" if Im in the car... or podcasts or audio books as I am in teh car a LOT in LA.
 
Flyingeek said:
I just bought a hard drive just for that purpose (pics and music) , but I havent gotten around to it yet. Im too paranoid to chuck the CD's until I have them backed up.
I still have about 400 vinyl records in Sweden that I wanna get over here. Some stuff just sounds right w static and stuff:-)

I do have three CD binders in my car, but I mostly listen to XM "the joint" if Im in the car... or podcasts or audio books as I am in teh car a LOT in LA.
Click to expand...

it definitely takes a ton of time to back up the cds. but its worth it in the long run. on average i have timed it to be 10 minutes per cd to rip to mp3. that times a real catalogue and you are talking major time to back this junk up. (i'm with you on the paranoia... that's why i would also suggest you back up that hard drive too. lol nothing would be worse than converting all of your music and then losing the data. ouch!!)

400 records sounds expensive to ship. the weight on that would be serious. but vinyl is timeless, i think it's totally worth it to take care of em and haul em around.
 
AdventurSum said:
it definitely takes a ton of time to back up the cds. but its worth it in the long run. on average i have timed it to be 10 minutes per cd to rip to mp3. that times a real catalogue and you are talking major time to back this junk up. (i'm with you on the paranoia... that's why i would also suggest you back up that hard drive too. lol nothing would be worse than converting all of your music and then losing the data. ouch!!)

400 records sounds expensive to ship. the weight on that would be serious. but vinyl is timeless, i think it's totally worth it to take care of em and haul em around.
Click to expand...

I ripped most of them, and I am struggling to gain motivation to rip the rest - I might have 100 to go but they have been waiting for years. I might never get to them.
ok, a hard drive ot the hard drive it is then.. they are pretty cheap these days.

I have some pretty cool records and I think I might spend the cash to ship them. Some do not exists as CDs and its not the same anyhow:-)
 
Flyingeek said:
I ripped most of them, and I am struggling to gain motivation to rip the rest - I might have 100 to go but they have been waiting for years. I might never get to them.
ok, a hard drive ot the hard drive it is then.. they are pretty cheap these days.

I have some pretty cool records and I think I might spend the cash to ship them. Some do not exists as CDs and its not the same anyhow:-)
Click to expand...

well that's the thing... if the data you are backing up is important to you, you prolly shouldn't get the insanely cheap hard drives. everyone has their preferences of brand but i've had 2 seagate drives crash on me with backup data, so they're on my sh*t list. personally i would suggest a western digital mybook (on the lower price end) or better yet a lacie drive (on the higher price end). and if you really wanna take it there, get a lacie with raid, that way you dont completely lose the data even if the drive fails. (well, one of the drives. lol)

yea, rare records are the shiznit. definitely worth the investment of shipping them, before something happens to them.
 
AdventurSum said:
well that's the thing... if the data you are backing up is important to you, you prolly shouldn't get the insanely cheap hard drives. everyone has their preferences of brand but i've had 2 seagate drives crash on me with backup data, so they're on my sh*t list. personally i would suggest a western digital mybook (on the lower price end) or better yet a lacie drive (on the higher price end). and if you really wanna take it there, get a lacie with raid, that way you dont completely lose the data even if the drive fails. (well, one of the drives. lol)

yea, rare records are the shiznit. definitely worth the investment of shipping them, before something happens to them.
Click to expand...

I have two WD hard drives, one portable and one regular but I was thinking about a large lacie - Ill check out raid. Thanks !!!
 
Yeah, I'll admit...I have two laptops. One used for web surfacing, the other used for my animation and classwork, while of course my television used to watch movies and such. Been a couple times when I've had all three running at the same time...
 
DenzBenz said:
Americans are spending more time watching television and surfing the Internet simultaneously, and nearly 60 percent of TV viewers use the Web at the same time at least once a month, according to a Nielsen report released on Monday.

r


Marcb 23, 2010

The Nielsen Three Screen Report said the findings in its study belied early concerns that the growing popularity of the Web would kill off traditional TV. "The initial fear was that Internet and mobile video and entertainment would slowly cannibalize traditional TV viewing, but the steady trend of increased TV viewership alongside expanded simultaneous usage argues something quite different," said Nielsen Co media product leader Matt O'Grady.

The report for 2009's fourth quarter, which tracked viewing across TV, the Internet and mobile phones, found a 35 percent rise in the amount of time Americans used the TV and Internet simultaneously compared with the same quarter in 2008. It found Americans now spend 3.5 hours per month watching TV while on the Internet. Active mobile video users grew by 57 percent over the year to 17.6 million from 11.2 million people, with much of the increase attributed to the growth of smartphones.

The report found that Americans now watch about 35 hours of TV per week and two hours of time-shifted TV via video recorders (DVR), with 25 to 34-year-olds making more use of time-shifting than any other age group. DVRs are now found in 35 percent of American households, the report said.

O'Grady said America's love affair with TV looks set to continue for the foreseeable future. "We seem to have an almost insatiable appetite for media, with online and mobile programing only adding to it," he said.

Source: Reuters

Related News
More Americans use TV, Internet at same time
Report: More web users watching TV while browsing internet
Mobile TV viewing figures shoot up
Click to expand...


its called multi-tasking.

i can masturbate , eat and make a sandwich and talk on the phone and watch tv.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom