Talk:MiniDVD

message: Isn't this format called cDVD and not mini-DVD? 132.205.15.34 01:11, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears that it was launched with the name cDVD but within the past 18 years the use of the term 'mini-DVD' has superseded the use of the original. Nikpourkeon (talk) 21:01, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: cDVD

message: "It was developed for use in camcorders, but unlike its full-sized 120 mm counterpart, it cannot be played back in most DVD players."
Isn't the principle benefit of these DVD camcorders that they are compatible with ordinary DVD players?
Every player I've encountered with a tray has had the indentations which allow an 80mm disc to sit perfectly, and those handful of players that use a hub/spindle mechanism (like the new PStwo) require no special accommodation--the only players that would have issues are those featuring slot-loading drives, most of which are only compatible with the full-sized 120mm discs.
Those based on DVD-RAM would not have tremendous compatibility, but that is because they are DVD-RAM, and so even 120mm discs would be similarly-incompatible. Those discs based on single-layered 80mm DVD-R discs should be compatible with the vast majority of players. The dual-layered versions now available would have less compatibility, but again it would be to the same extent that the full-sized 120mm are compatible.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.162.253 (talk) 19:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 80mm DVD compatibility

message: I've split this article. It had a "split?" notice a while ago which Mikus removed saying "IMHO, no need to split this article". This was somewhat unilateral, and I'd normally consider that bad form. However, in his/her defence it had been there a long time and no-one had done anything about it.
Back to the point- IMHO the article clearly *did* warrant splitting. Articles are arranged by subject, not name- i.e. we have separate articles for clearly different subjects that happen to have the same name (and normally have a single article for a single subject with multiple names).
This article was clearly trying to fit at least two (if not three or four) technologically distinct meanings into a single page, complete with pseudo-disambiguation. Seems a pretty clear-cut case to me. Ubcule (talk) 16:14, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest merging this article into main DVD article. After all, MiniDVD is nothing but a 8cm sized DVD, it has nothing special about it but size. Mikus (talk) 23:09, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article split

message: The page looks a bit bare so I was wondering if we could build  it up a bit with miniDVD history. Maybe the mini movies? 2607:FEA8:BB60:E300:79A6:D125:6394:9A26 (talk) 10:32, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to expand it. If you want some information on getting started, take a look at Help:Introduction and Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia. The main thing to keep in mind is that information should be attributed to Wikipedia:Reliable sources. I don't think a full list of all movies would be a good idea though (since I imagine there are a lot of them), for the same reason a full list of movies released on full-sized DVDs would be a bad idea. --Pokechu22 (talk) 18:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey all… 

message: Was there an actual reason movies were made available on this format? I guess for portable media players like the PSP (albeit those used the UMD format). MightyArms (talk) 18:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose of this format?