Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9 (Read 18614 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Outside of pure sound quality issues... why else would you suggest against someone (a person or company) using Microsoft Windows Media Format for encoding their digital audio library?  Thanks in advance.

Why isn't there a WMedia "forum" here?

BTW, I'm a huge supporter of EAC/LAME/APextreme and that's all I currently use.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #1 –
I asked a very similar question!    And I think the short answer is that its no good.

click here for more

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #2 –
Your questions have been asked and answered many times.
You can search the forum if you want.

Anyway, i'll point some reasons:

1. Sound quality sucks.
2. It's a super closed format
3. It only works in Windows, not cross platform
4. Microsoft is evil
5. Microsoft 0wnZ j00 already, don't let them own you any more, especially in a field they STINK at

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #3 –
Quote
1. Sound quality sucks.


That as always is very debatable. I myself do not like it though. But some people are happy with their 64Kbps CD quality WMA2. =P

Quote
2. It's a super closed format


No argument there. If anyone tries to play the format without using the Microsoft code/SDK they will be threattened to and eventually have the pants sued off them.

Quote
3. It only works in Windows, not cross platform


Not entirely true. There is minor support for it under the older Mac OS, and there is a version of WMP 6.4 for Solaris. But yes Windows is the main, and pretty much only propperly supported platform. But that is still a valid argument against it.

Quote
4. Microsoft is evil


Now that's stating the obvious. 

Quote
5. Microsoft 0wnZ j00 already, don't let them own you any more, especially in a field they STINK at


What is really scarry is that this is the case. They have a monopoly on the desktop. They are using said monopoly to create a media monopoly using their closed guarded formats. Then they are using that to try and create a monopoly on console gaming systems and set top media players. They would also like to monopolise the portable audio player market. Everyone knows at this point Microsoft is the worst when it comes to bullies and they never consider playing fair. People have allowed Microsoft to reach juggernaught status so they can trample and stamp out any commercial competition without trying. I mean ask yourself. Why is it that the only competition to Microsoft, and the best competition to Microsoft are generally free, opensource, or operations not interested in proffit? Because if they are free Microsoft can't buy them. If they are opensource Microsoft can't close and monopolise them. If they are not interested in proffit solely Microsoft can't buy them out.

Here is another reason not to use WMA. If you want to share your files with friends are they all gonna be able to use WMA? Or will they more likely be able to play MP3 with less problem?

I may be an exception, but I run BeOS, Windows, Linux , and more all at the same time. If I get a file in WMA format then I am stuck with it under Windows solely. On the other hand if I have MP3 or Vorbis I can go anywhere and do anything with them.

Lats but not least you should not use it because you want to resist DRM, the RIAA, and their whims to trample your fair use rights. Even if you do not use the DRM feature you popularise the format and make the use of it's DRM much more likely. I used to like Peter Gabriel. But now I am not so sure. Is all this recent stuff shenannigan by his bosses. Or does he actually believe that what he is doing is right.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #4 –
temp? No not really  just didn't feel like pointing out more reasons. Won't do it either. HA!

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #5 –
Quote
temp? No not really  just didn't feel like pointing out more reasons. Won't do it either. HA!

No I just can't get used to this boards quoting style. I like to break up a post and respond to pieces specificly. I used temp as a place holder to allow me to go back and easily do so.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #6 –
Heh.. Yeah pretty hard to get used to.. I think they'll change things with the upcoming Invision Board version.

edited: and, i totally agree with all you said above.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #7 –
DRM ring a bell?

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #8 –
IMHO, none of the above should really stop you from using Windows Media 9.

While it's always good to take the advice of others into consideration, do not let them stop you from making your OWN choice. Sure, WMA9 isn't the best out there (yet), but if you really want to use it, by all means go ahead.


Another thing I can never ever understand. To all those people who go round calling Microsoft evil, Microsoft bad, let me just ask you a question - Do you use any Microsoft products in your personal computing life?

If the answer is yes, please STFU. If you want to go around bashing companies, please, by all means go ahead, but live up to your beliefs - no Windows at home, no Office, no Internet Explorer,  none of these at all... Only then do I believe that one is qualified to insult Microsoft...

Otherwise, if you go around insulting Microsoft while still using their products at home (at work, corporate policy is another thing .. ), then it makes you a hypocrite. Plain and simple.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #9 –
Quote
IMHO, none of the above should really stop you from using Windows Media 9.

While it's always good to take the advice of others into consideration, do not let them stop you from making your OWN choice. Sure, WMA9 isn't the best out there (yet), but if you really want to use it, by all means go ahead.


It is your oppinion. You are free to have it. But if you don't see any downside to what was above then you are only deluding yourself or just plain naieve.


Quote
Another thing I can never ever understand. To all those people who go round calling Microsoft evil, Microsoft bad, let me just ask you a question - Do you use any Microsoft products in your personal computing life?

If the answer is yes, please STFU. If you want to go around bashing companies, please, by all means go ahead, but live up to your beliefs - no Windows at home, no Office, no Internet Explorer,  none of these at all... Only then do I believe that one is qualified to insult Microsoft...Otherwise, if you go around insulting Microsoft while still using their products at home (at work, corporate policy is another thing .. ), then it makes you a hypocrite. Plain and simple.


You need to learn a few things about reality and maturity. There is a very real difference between "wanting" to run windows and being "forced" to or "needing" to. I don't run Windows because I want to. I would preffer to remove it from my system entirely. But due to the way Microsoft leverages their monopoly(see bludgeoning all competitors around the head and neck with it) to stifle competition, open standards, and any alternatives in some areas. Once Avery Lee gets Virtualdub for Unix or something similar is crafted Windows is out of here. That is the only program I use under Windows at home. And I am near getting it to run under Wine.

On the subject of ditching Windows toally. By your account Mr so called idiot savant, or perhaps idiot fits better. If we were good Linux fanatic Windows bashers we should ditch Windows entirely. Forgive me for making you look a bit ignorant,(believe me it was not hard) if I never ran windows at all ever then how could I make any viable opinions/judgement on which is better. Who would take someone seriously on a subject they have no knowledge of?(now you see why it looks like I don't like you, or take you seriously) Actual knowledge of what you speak is immensly helpful. I suggest you get some.

On the usage of the word hypocrite,(I think you should put the mirror down and face facts) you are the only true hypocrite here. Before you open your trap and shove your foot in up to the ankle again I will give you a few pointers. You might be a hypocrite Windows basher if you call it Windoze/Winblows. You might be a hypocrite Winows basher if you call Microsoft Micro$oft. You definatly are a hypocrite if you even dare call me or anyone else who posted here such. No one here is posting fanatacism. It is cold hard fact.

Here is a simple logic test for you to teethe yourself on. If you agree you pass, if you disagree than you fail and are contrary to society as a whole.

If bullies are not good then they are ........... bad. One might say evil.
Microsoft are bullies.(I and everyone here will likely chip in a million dollars to your bank account if you could prove otherwise)
Then if Microsoft are bullies it is simple logic that they are bad/evil.

It is not that I or anyone else here think that everyone who works at Microsoft are Satan's spawn.(Satan not Santa. Microsoft never gives you anything free) I know good people who work at Microsoft. Unfortuanatly they are not in any position to steer the company. The ones who are are the ones to blame. For them it is imperative for them to benefit at anyones expense but their own. You might argue that there is nothing wrong with that and it is all simple business. And that is partly true. But "any" other business with Microsoft's power/influence are either regulated or broken up. Microsoft has been allowed to exist as an exception because they write software(intangible goods) for computer systems(stuff the guys who make the laws don't understand, couldn't care less about, and would rather not touch).

As to your Avatar. SES is ok. But I tend to preffer Utada Hikaru, Shonen Knife, X-Japan or even SPEED. I really love those Kingdom Heats promos with the Utada Hikaru track. I just find myself watching her Sakura Drops video over and over and over.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #10 –
Quote
Do you use any Microsoft products in your personal computing life?

If the answer is yes, please STFU. If you want to go around bashing companies, please, by all means go ahead, but live up to your beliefs - no Windows at home, no Office, no Internet Explorer, none of these at all... Only then do I believe that one is qualified to insult Microsoft...

I think it's quite the opposite: if you have never used MS-products how should you tell they are bad?

It was only yesterday I had to start IE (normally I use Mozilla) to get an ordinary link to an exe file on microsoft.com! It would have been no problem for the MS-web developers to make their site more compatible, but they deliberately decided against it.

There are hundreds of examples where MS used its (marketing) power to suppress competition in a most inelegant way.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #11 –
To me, the main problem with WMA9 is not DRM, Microsoft, or multi-platform compatibility....it is sound quality. Test after test has placed wma down at the very bottom of the heap in terms of sound quality. If the codec were really to offer fanatastic, "unmatched sound quality at any bitrate", I think that it would have more users....it is supported in many hardware devices, after all. However, IMO wma 2,7,8,9 offers the worst sound quality of any major format, and the most salient, annoying, and unneccessary artifacts at all but the highest bitrates. WMA9, even in VBR mode, is not much of an improvment over it's predecessors. Perhaps the only good thing to come out of wma is the remote possibility that the new "lossless mode" will see hardware support in DVD players, etc. In fact, I really don't know anybody who uses wma....even my audio-uneducated friends think wma sounds like %$#$. 

In the whole scheme of things, DRM and the whole bit doesn't mean very much if your codec can't deliver halfway-decent sound quality. Thus, wma is not a contender in my book.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #12 –
Quote
While it's always good to take the advice of others into consideration, do not let them stop you from making your OWN choice. Sure, WMA9 isn't the best out there (yet), but if you really want to use it, by all means go ahead.

A-men! 

Quote
Otherwise, if you go around insulting Microsoft while still using their products at home (at work, corporate policy is another thing .. ), then it makes you a hypocrite. Plain and simple.


Halleluja!   
ZZee ya, Hans-Jürgen
BLUEZZ BASTARDZZ - "That lil' ol' ZZ Top cover band from Hamburg..."
INDIGO ROCKS - "Down home rockin' blues. Tasty as strudel."

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #13 –
I have to admit Microsoft makes a good operating system....

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #14 –
Quote
I have to admit Microsoft makes a good operating system....

How many OS have you tried? Just out of curiosity.

After using MacOS 5-X, Linux based OS from kernel version .6 and up, Solaris(6,7, and 8 ), Net BSD, Free BSD, BeOS, QnX, MsDOS 1-7, PC DOS, and all versions of Windows(except for Windows2(286) and Lan Manager) as far as the actual OS goes it is marginal. It is full of fairly buggy fluff, but the OS underpining Windows has always been behind the curve and deficient. It was one of the last to have protected mode and related aplications(everything up till ME was a series of virtual real mode DOS machines run in tandem to provide the illusion of multitasking etc). It was one of the last to have it's own robust TCP/IP stack(We are at Windows XP and they still don't have it perfected). The funny thing is that Microsoft got their TCP/IP stack from BSD and it was fully functional. They butchered it enough though so they can spend the next several years releasing service packs and new versions to make you think they have been working on the code. Windows is also one of the last OS to provide users terminal services or remote desktop access or shell access. XP has this a bit but it is majorly lacking even when compared to pre circa 1980's UNIXs let alone any other OS out there today.

One thing you can give Microsoft kudos on is thier investment in Rn'D for their GUI which came from someone elses IP and Microsoft used without permission. It is one of the most user frinedly GUIs out there. But that is not saying much since it is also one of the few GUIs out there the average user ever sees. And even with all the millions invested in their stolen, user friendly GUI they can't get the little things right like consistency. In some Microsoft aplications Close Exits. In others it Closes a window. Cut and Paste between Word Pad and the Comand Line and results will varry often. I am not talking about 3-rd party aplications here. And while we are on the subject of GUIs Microsoft was also one of the last to have themable GUIs. And even XPs themability is not mature or perfect.

Also as of today Microsoft simply places swap memory on the same partition as your DATA!  That is a stupid idea if I ever heard one. Swap should be on a separate partition or disk even. Granted if the average Windows user were very knowledgable they would do this on their own. But having said that it is safe to say that less than 1% of windows users do. BSD and Linux right out ofd the box tell you to put it on a separate partition at least. Of course one thing having a swap file on your system partition is good for is slowing down your system and fragmenting your hard disk. Oh and hard disk fragmentation! Microsoft is one of the last/only OS that still has problems with it.

I could go on but I think you might notice a pattern.

Back to the subject of why not to use WMA. Any audio expert that claims you can achieve CD quality at 64Kbps let alone any lossy codec is a charlitan and full of crap.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #15 –
Quote
I have to admit Microsoft makes a good operating system....

i think there are many that would admit to no such thing. M$ makes an easy OS, i dunno if that makes it a good OS...

edit: oops, too slow...

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #16 –
Quote
Quote
I have to admit Microsoft makes a good operating system....

i think there are many that would admit to no such thing. M$ makes an easy OS, i dunno if that makes it a good OS...

LOL    See above.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #17 –
Quote
Do you use any Microsoft products in your personal computing life?


Yup, I use Windows 98 and 2k and I consider both good operating systems. But that doesn't matter if I like them coz I don't have much choice if I want to have some gaming for time to time.

Quote
If the answer is yes, please STFU. If you want to go around bashing companies, please, by all means go ahead, but live up to your beliefs - no Windows at home, no Office, no Internet Explorer


Except for the Os, I don't use any MS products because they just suck royally. I have every right to bash MS - MS is evil and makes crappy software. :-)

Quote
then it makes you a hypocrite

Yeah, that's me.


Btw Neo Neko - that's a kickass avatar. :-)

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #18 –
Quote
Except for the Os, I don't use any MS products because they just suck royally. I have every right to bash MS - MS is evil and they makes crappy software. :-)

no, actually, i really like my mouse. and my keyboard. while the drivers for the mice aren't the greatest, i hate the wheel on logitech mice with a passion. i haven't really found any keyboard or mouse manufacturer that i like anywhere near as much as m$. as far as keyboards and mice go, anyway...

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #19 –
First off, I would like to emphasize a point made in my first post - that the freedom of choice is what is important. You shouldn't use .. say Ogg or MPC just because someone tells you to. The choice is first and foremost yours to make - you make the decision to heed their advice or not, but in no way should you EVER have to choose MPC just because someone ORDERED you to.


Quote
You need to learn a few things about reality and maturity. There is a very real difference between "wanting" to run windows and being "forced" to or "needing" to. I don't run Windows because I want to. I would preffer to remove it from my system entirely. But due to the way Microsoft leverages their monopoly(see bludgeoning all competitors around the head and neck with it) to stifle competition, open standards, and any alternatives in some areas. Once Avery Lee gets Virtualdub for Unix or something similar is crafted Windows is out of here. That is the only program I use under Windows at home. And I am near getting it to run under Wine.


Perhaps I did not make it clear, but in my original post, I did differentiate between NEED TO and CHOOSE TO. At work, if you have to use Windows or any other Microsoft products, fine, by all means. Your employer is paying you to do your job. You don't really have much say.

But what about those who run Windows at home by CHOICE and then go around bashing it and bemoaning Microsoft? There is plainly no excuse for such behaviour. If you want to make a statement, by all means live by your statement. Microsoft is bad. Windows sucks. But I need Windows to play my favourite games! Well, if what you say is truly what you believe, then the loss of a few games to uphold your belief will not mean much to you. It isn't that there aren't games at all for other OSes ( Lokigames, WineX for Linux ). But to say that Microsoft sucks, yet you still use their OS and products out of choice, that plainly to me is hyprocritical.

Another thing I never truly understand - that Microsoft leverages its monopoly to absolutely squash standards. I do agree that in any area Microsoft chooses to compete in, it tries every method to become the dominant force - even using underhanded means. However, IMHO, alternatives are present and will always remain so. Perhaps not in the corporate environment, where the choice is not yours to make, but in your own personal life. Don't like Windows? Linux, BSD. Don't like IE? Mozilla, Opera. Don't like Office? OpenOffice, Abiword... The choice is yours to make. Packaging something in my default does in no way mean that you have to use it.

Quote
On the subject of ditching Windows toally. By your account Mr so called idiot savant, or perhaps idiot fits better. If we were good Linux fanatic Windows bashers we should ditch Windows entirely. Forgive me for making you look a bit ignorant,(believe me it was not hard) if I never ran windows at all ever then how could I make any viable opinions/judgement on which is better. Who would take someone seriously on a subject they have no knowledge of?(now you see why it looks like I don't like you, or take you seriously) Actual knowledge of what you speak is immensly helpful. I suggest you get some.


In no way did I ever at all say that one should make a comparision without evaluating the products. I don't know how you can read so much into my first post, but simply put, I called hyprocrites those who SAID something and DID another. It is perfectly fine in my book to have run Windows before and then moved on totally from it. In these case, you are no LONGER using Microsoft products, and can feel free to bash them with total belief in your statement.

However, if you have used Microsoft's products, used another product, found it to be better, yet STILL use Microsoft and bash Microsoft for being evil, then that makes you a hyprocrite.

In general, I don't appreciate personal attacks. Note in my post that NO WHERE did I ever bash Linux or anything. Nor was I ever making a comparision between Microsoft and any other company. Instead, I was making a rant against those who simply DID NOT or CHOSE NOT to live up to their beliefs. They are hypocrites. Where does your question that one needs to compare to choose, and that I need to get hands on experience ( which I quite clearly have BTW.. I've worked on Solaris, AIX, Linux, NT and 2K systems at work.. The only stuff I haven't really messed around with are Macs) come into question? I fear that you simply are jumping around without any basis.

Any why would I be a hyprocrite myself? I never bashed Microsoft nor any company/OS/software in my post. On the contrary, if you would look through the entire thread, quite clearly, you were the one doing so.

I don't know what the hell those who replied negatively are getting at, but you seem to think that I'm bashing all the Microsoft-bashers, that I'm a Microsoft lover. Well, I'm not any of the above. I didn't bash Microsoft-bashers, on the contrary, all I said was that those who bash Microsoft should live up to their beliefs in their personal capacity. Otherwise, they are simply plain hyprocrites. That's all. And this is the issue that needs to be addressed.

Oh, and Utada Hikaru, X-Japan, Shonen Knife are Japanese artistes/groups. SES is a Korean group, even though they have had Japanese releases. Quite clearly two different entitities, just so Neo Neko might like to know.

To those who chose not to use WMAv9 for its (poor) quality, by all means, I support your decision. It is just that it shouldn't simply be because people .. hey.. someone told you that you couldn't use it.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #20 –
Oh and kudos to Q! for admitting he's a hypocrite  Well at least he had the guts to face up to such a fact.

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #21 –
yes, try wma and delete it yourself 

btw, i would love to remove the IE but the damn thing is the basis of windows, the html engine is loaded into memory even if you don't use it. I would like to see a windows version in which you can remove wmp, IE or outlook!

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #22 –
Sigh here we go again...the usual MS bashing tripe.

Why not try WMA9? "because of the sound quality", well WMA9 now supports LossLess audio, so the sound quality is 100% the same as the original.

"It only runs on Windows" wrong, apart from mp3 it is the most supported format on portable players.

"Microsoft are evil" if you want a really evil company have a look at Apple - even with its pitifull market share it goes around sueing / threatening individuals, or review sites (not companies). I am glad apple are not any bigger...BTW I cannot remember anytime MS have sued an individual for making a toolbar look like the on in Office, Apple would.

The board is guilty of speading false information, which in my opinion is wrong and damaging - imagine someone coming here they read this crap and decide not to touch WMA, despite having a 64MB portable mp3 player that supports it, they would then listen to inferior mp3 encoded at lower bitrates (64Kbps).

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #23 –
well, portable players are not considered as operating systems

Arguments Against Using Windows Media 9

Reply #24 –
Quote
well, portable players are not considered as operating systems

No, but what does that have to do with this thread? The fact remains: wma files can be decoded on other platforms than PC/Windows.