WMA might take over, many people prefer wma already. Options

[qualityequalizer]

I do not like the attitude in this forum that WMA is some sort of inferior format. In fact if you take a look at the tests (http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html), notice how unfair they are. Notice the average bitrate - wma is 128 while ogg and mpc are 135.
My point is that with wma pro doing much better and Microsoft pushing this format hard and the DM support finding favor with record companies, wma can easily crush the mp3 revolution.

The only way to combat this is to develop OGG to be on equal par with wma (sound quality wise). pretty soon Microsoft will conduct its own tests (obviously biased) that will make them think wma is best.
- I am basing the above on some problems with OGG
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=18359
AND WHAY ARE WE not discussing problems with WMA on this forum?!!!
Are they any problems at all? Sure it might help microsoft a bit but it would show that their format has problems too.


What needs to be done is for fair tests to be made without discrediting wma. Increasing ogg support in hardware players would helpt too.
OGG is the only hope for consumers who want to be free from restrictions when ripping their music- and it has to be pushed..

Otherwise we will all be stuck with wma pro ,,,

Just my opinion ... By the way I hate wma simply because of the DRm thing....I'm sure everyone does. And it is ON by default in WMP contrary to what many Microsoft zealots say.

[krmathis]

WMA is not supported in open-source operating systems (ex. GNU/Linux, *BSD).
Thats more than enough reason for me to stay away. ..