I might be mistaken as to your intent, but it at least looked more like you initiated a Soviet-style bullying into a centralized concept under the guise of limited resources, where a centralized authority (namely, you) determines the only acceptable product; not a capitalist-style accommodation of consumer free choice at a nominal added expense, where the market naturally selects the best format, and the others just fall into disuse until they are not economically supportable. I did not see where you argued that the economic, naturally-selected point of disuse had arrived; instead, I saw lots of posts in which you argued that DJs who still use CDs should "get with the program" and be forced to use a laptop (a centralized product) and that they will thank us later for making the decision for them (a classic Soviet justification). And the best way to force them to do so was to deprive them of the choice of how to operate their "business."Mr Awesomer wrote:If anything I was suggesting a CAPITALIST approach... he who best equips themselves and offers the best product at the best price wins.
To continue the DJ-in-economics argument, the economic pie gets bigger and the barriers to entry as a DJ get smaller if a venue allows new DJs to DJ from CDs, just as it did for a venue to have an "Auxiliary" input for laptops when people first started using laptops. In contrast, the barriers to entry artificially increase if you eliminate the least expensive form of DJing. Also, to touch another concern of yours, to the extent that the barriers to entry can be diminished by downloading free music that someone else has ripped to MP3s, you will unintentionally encourage the very "Napster DJs" whom you loathe even more than CD DJs. "Hey, I spent a thousand dollars on a laptop so I can DJ; I can't also afford to buy my music, too."
And these economics are all premised upon your insistence that the cost of a dual-CD player is small. If it were a huge burden to accommodate that choice, then I would see more of a dilemma. But there is no such problem. Moreover, I would suggest that this minimal cost is best borne by a venue that uses multiple DJs, not by individual DJs who would need to get duplicative setup to those owned by other DJs. But that, too, is not a choice I would profess to make for every venue, in every town, in every market (area) of the country, no less the world.