Talk:MII (videocassette format)

"MII has also been known as being a notoriously unreliable format for various reasons, as discussed from a Wikipedia user's first-hand experience with MII"

Aren't Wikipedia articles not supposed to do their own research? The comments from the Wikipedia user's firsthand experience with MII aren't even cited as a resource. 68.102.127.239 00:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is this OR (presumably unpublished elsewhere), but the user's experience with the medium comes after its popular lifetime as stated earlier. It feels like someone writing a review of a deck that's seen many years of heavy use. 208.66.208.200 07:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it suits things here more proper, I'll excise that particular passage of this article, due to it's lack of being an official cited source (just possible hearsay from another WP user), and since you all have brought up some good points that I failed to realize when I previously edited/created this article. MII probably was a good format initially, it was probably the lack of service & support from Panasonic, not the build quality of MII hardware, that was its demise, I would assume. misternuvistor 18:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - I am the above-mentioned first-hand user. It's been a while since I checked back here, and see that my comments on M-Screw have been removed. I am a TV news photographer who had to use MII on a daily basis. About the above comments:

"Aren't Wikipedia articles not supposed to do their own research? The comments from the Wikipedia user's firsthand experience with MII aren't even cited as a resource."

-I didn't have to do any "research." I EXPERIENCED IT. I had to work with that piece of crap format on a daily basis, not through any choice of my own, but because of decisions by penny-pinching the management types above me who were only thinking of the bottom line, but didn't have to deal with it themselves. Research. Give me a break.

"Not only is this OR (presumably unpublished elsewhere), but the user's experience with the medium comes after its popular lifetime as stated earlier."

-It was my COMMENTS, not my experience, that came after it's so-called "popular lifetime." My experience with it occurred in 1990-1991. The format had only been in existence for 5 years. Since then, I've worked with lots of other formats where the equipment had "many years of heavy use," but none ever had the problems associated with MII. Also, everyone reading this should keep one thing in mind: Anytime that anyone says that MII was "popular," what is meant is that it was popular by the management-type suits at TV stations and networks, to whom it was appealing because it was CHEAP. Those people never had to deal directly with it's many technical problems.

"MII probably was a good format initially,..." NO, MII was NEVER a good format.

What does "OR" stand for? Yes, it was unpublished elsewhere. That's why I published it on Wikipedia, because I felt it needed to be published, even if only on the internet. If you really want a source, go to the message boards at www.b-roll.net, a site for TV news photographers, and ask people there about it. I'm sure you'll get plenty of flattering comments about what a wonder format MII was. Stevearon 02:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MII (videocassette format). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:59, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]