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

[DonP]

I am not pushing the wma format just trying to be neutral. Obviously many in this forum think that a few listening tests with people who are not aware of mp3 artifacts will prove anything... I can pick out mp3's quite easily but I am not aware of the wma artifacts *which i am sure do exist - i just don't know what they are*

Aside from the depts of the FHG testing lab you might have trouble finding a population better at noticing mp3 artifacts than there is here. Not everyone, but quite a few who are extreme about it.

[~*McoreD*~]

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.

You haven't obviously tried Windows Media Player 9 or 10. Else you are not stating the real facts.
DRM was on by default in WMP 7.1 and WMP 8 and had no warnings.
DRM was on by default in WMP 9 but warned you prior to your first rip.
WMP 10 does not have it turned on by default.

[kotrtim]

WMA might over...but I really hope this will not happen

M$ will be dominating in every market....
This is bad, other smaller companies cannot compete with M$
There is no more competition then!!!

Anyway WMA has no obvious advantages over other formats...
I really hate the way WMA std encode "guitar"!

[bubka]

i like wma on my portable, q25 vbr is decent file size quality ratio for portable

[CSMR]

I doubt that 7 kbps make such a big difference.

Quite a lot I should think at such a low starting point. Massive difference between 128 and 160 for instance, which is only four or five times the difference. Whereas the difference between codecs at the same bit rate is much less, so in a comparison the 7kbs difference can be expected to be significant.
Not that I care.

[kwanbis]

WMA might over...but I really hope this will not happen

M$ will be dominating in every market....
This is bad, other smaller companies cannot compete with M$
There is no more competition then!!!

Anyway WMA has no obvious advantages over other formats...
I really hate the way WMA std encode "guitar"!

AMEN ... THIS is the major problem the people DON'T see ... the clearest example is webmail ... hotmail was offering a paltry 2MB ... yahoo went from 6MB to 4MB ... than gmail started offering 1000 MB ... 500x what hotmail was offering ... (lets read the last frase again: five hundred times what hotmail was offering) ... after that, hotmail moved to 100MB ... yahoo to 250MB ... and again hotmail to 250MB ... as it is obviously seen COMPETITION IS GOOD ... problem is that microsoft KILLS competition ... if microsoft where to gain the music market, they would stop developing WMA for sure, only adding more DRM if needed ... look what happened wiht IE ... while they where the underdogs, they keep getting new versions, bundling it with windows, the works ... when they secured the 90% market share, they stoped developing IE. but PEOPLE JUST DONT SEE IT.

This post has been edited by kwanbis: Mar 11 2005, 13:58

[flipik]

[/quote]
AMEN ... THIS is the major problem the people DON'T see ... the clearest example is webmail ... hotmail was offering a paltry 2MB ... yahoo went from 6MB to 4MB ... than gmail started offering 1000 MB ... 500x what hotmail was offering ... (lets read the last frase again: five hundred times what hotmail was offering) ... after that, hotmail moved to 100MB ... yahoo to 250MB ... and again hotmail to 250MB ... as it is obviously seen COMPETITION IS GOOD ... problem is that microsoft KILLS competition ... if microsoft where to gain the music market, they would stop developing WMA for sure, only adding more DRM if needed ... look what happened wiht IE ... while they where the underdogs, they keep getting new versions, bundling it with windows, the works ... when they secured the 90% market share, they stoped developing IE. but PEOPLE JUST DONT SEE IT.

[/quote]

nothing's forever if you've got something to eat, place to sleep and warm shower to use.. just relax, life is too short to worry about every monopoly that comes around

[rjamorim]

nothing's forever    if you've got something to eat, place to sleep and warm shower to use.. just relax, life is too short to worry about every monopoly that comes around 

Wow. So there is actually someone here that doesn't get stressed at each move Bill Gates does.

That's a great attitude, flipik. Way to go.

[kwanbis]

nothing's forever    if you've got something to eat, place to sleep and warm shower to use.. just relax, life is too short to worry about every monopoly that comes around 

[music_man_mpc]

nothing's forever    if you've got something to eat, place to sleep and warm shower to use.. just relax, life is too short to worry about every monopoly that comes around 

[rant]
He has got a point. Microsoft's monopoly is not nearly as important as say global warming or the AIDS pandemic in africa or the huge pollution problems in China or the people who are still suffering as a result of Asian tsunami or the hundreds of thousands who starve to death around the world every day. Compared to these things, who really gives a f**k about m$? I think the answer is pretty simple: We do. Should we care about things like the best lossy codec, the fastest decoding lossless codec, the speed of our computers, the m*****-f***ing 1337ness of our software????? NO! We shouldn't care, but we; and even flipik, obviously do care or else we wouldn't be hear wasting our time talking about such inane things.
[/rant]

[kwanbis]

well, actually, in a perfect world, we would all be doing something so that there are no 5billon millonaire, while there are people dying without food, but sadly, "madre teresa de calcuta", are few ... so i give money to greenpeace monthly, and try to convince people to not promote monopolies

[ddrawley]

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

I shall not be assimilated.

[beej]

Why would you support a company that does their best to deny
you to use your music as you wish with their DRM crap.
And make no mistake about it, they don't care about producing
the very best audio format they can, it's rather all about the
market share they can gain. Even if it means screwing over their
own customers.
Support some of the open formats instead.

[rjamorim]

And make no mistake about it, they don't care about producing the very best audio format they can

Might not, but they at least try to produce a format better than what the MPEG is producing (so far, they are failing).

It's all about competition.

[WarChild]

I know more people who are curious about ogg than they are about wmp. The more M$ tries to shove it down peoples throats the more they rebel. See how many people are buying wmp files compared to acc.
I know a couple of people who loaded up on napster and were keen on it for a while until they realized a heavy increase in listenr fatigue listening to 128 wma.

[beej]

Might not, but they at least try to produce a format better than what the MPEG is producing (so far, they are failing).

It's all about competition.

Yes, it's about competition, but not on equal terms.
They are using one monopoly to gain another, that's what's wrong.

I wonder how many people got their music unintensionally DRM'ed just
because they were not aware that it was on by default in WMP7.

[rjamorim]

They are using one monopoly to gain another, that's what's wrong.

If I were in BG's position I would do the same. Pretty much everyone around here would so the same too, even though several would be hypocrite and claim they wouldn't, no, never.

Scream at the american government for not taking measures to break Microsoft's monopoly. Don't blame Microsoft for taking advantage of a situation that's highly favourable to them.

I wonder how many people got their music unintensionally DRM'ed just
because they were not aware that it was on by default in WMP7.

Several for sure. But what's the point of whining so much? Is Microsoft profitting in any way from that? Surely not, quite the opposite: people that got their music locked after a system reinstall are probably hating Microsoft now.

I can't see any advantage whatsoever to them on turning on DRM by default. I can only see that as pressure from the RIAA & crew. So stop hating Microsoft and start hating the RIAA, if you badly need someone to hate.

This post has been edited by rjamorim: Mar 11 2005, 23:49

[kwanbis]

well ... i agree in parts ... is like saying don't hate the drug producers, hate the goverment for not stoping them ... govertment tries (not very eficiently) to stop them ... the same can be said about the govertment trying to stop MS ... either way, both, drug producers, and MS, are doing wrong.

EDIT: if even if being ILEGAL, de goverment couldn't arrest you, because of some incompetence, would you thief?

This post has been edited by kwanbis: Mar 12 2005, 00:35

[rjamorim]

well ... i agree in parts ... is like saying don't hate the drug producers, hate the goverment for not stoping them ... govertment tries (not very eficiently) to stop them ... the same can be said about the govertment trying to stop MS ... either way, both, drug producers, and MS, are doing wrong.

But the drug producers are obviously breaking the law, and doing very big harm to society.

I don't know if Microsoft is breaking the law or not, but they are not doing anything blatantly illegal like selling drugs (as far as we know ), and I don't think they are particularly harmful. Some of their practices are harmful, others aren't, and you can say the same about pretty much every big corporation.

EDIT: if even if being ILEGAL, de goverment couldn't arrest you, because of some incompetence, would you thief?

That is a very pernicious question because, in my current situation, I don't need to thieve, so it's very easy for me to say I wouldn't.

If I was in hunger, or badly needing money because of some emergency, God only knows how my rationalization processes would work. In that situation, I might consider thievery an attractive option.

This post has been edited by rjamorim: Mar 12 2005, 00:43

[beej]

If I were in BG's position I would do the same. Pretty much everyone around here would so the same too, even though several would be hypocrite and claim they wouldn't, no, never.

Scream at the american government for not taking measures to break Microsoft's monopoly. Don't blame Microsoft for taking advantage of a situation that's highly favourable to them.

I'm not screaming, where did you get that from?
I'm just saying that that's one reason you shouldn't use wma.

Not to speak about what you are going to do with your music
ten years from now when a wma decoder isn't available any more.
With open formats you can be reasonably sure that you will still
be able to listen to it.

People have a choice of what they want to use, they should just be
made aware of the implications of their choice.

I wonder how many people got their music unintensionally DRM'ed just
because they were not aware that it was on by default in WMP7.

Several for sure. But what's the point of whining so much? Is Microsoft profitting in any way from that? Surely not, quite the opposite: people that got their music locked after a system reinstall are probably hating Microsoft now.

I can't see any advantage whatsoever to them on turning on DRM by default. I can only see that as pressure from the RIAA & crew. So stop hating Microsoft and start hating the RIAA, if you badly need someone to hate.

Yes, they are probably a lot more loyal to the RIAA than to their customers.
I despise any company that are so completely void of any business ethics or morals, yes.

But i don't lie awake at night thinking about it :-)

[rjamorim]

I'm not screaming, where did you get that from?

I just said you SHOULD scream. Would make easier to control all that pent up anger

Not to speak about what you are going to do with your music
ten years from now when a wma decoder isn't available any more.

How can you be so sure about that? Nostradamus, are you?

With open formats you can be reasonably sure that you will still be able to listen to it.

There is already an open source WMA Std. decoder. And a fella just showed us the power of reverse engineering.

People have a choice of what they want to use, they should just be
made aware of the implications of their choice.

Right. And that's applicable to pretty much every situation.

That is, you just gave us a glimpe of the obvious. :B

Yes, they are probably a lot more loyal to the RIAA than to their customers.
I despise any company that are so completely void of any business ethics or morals, yes.

It's not about loyalty. Did the consumers made pressure on them to keep DRM disabled?

Shit, if they were so loyal to RIAA, you wouldn't be able to disable DRM and they wouldn't have disabled it as default on WMP 10.

Get a grip, man. And what's with mixing ethics to this discussion? Do you even know how is their ethos? It is probably different than yours - and not any less valid because of that.

This post has been edited by rjamorim: Mar 12 2005, 00:47

[beej]

Not to speak about what you are going to do with your music
ten years from now when a wma decoder isn't available any more.

How can you be so sure about that? Nostradamus, are you?

OK if I change it to "if a wma decoder isn't available", is it then more clear to you what I meant?

With open formats you can be reasonably sure that you will still be able to listen to it.

There is already an open source WMA Std. decoder. And a fella just showed us the power of reverse engineering.

But why go through the trouble of reverse engineering something when there are loads of other open formats?

People have a choice of what they want to use, they should just be
made aware of the implications of their choice.

Right. And that's appliable to pretty much situation.

That is, you just gave us a glimpe of the obvious. :B

People have a choice but they don't necessarily know about it, that's what I'm trying to say.

Get a grip, man. And what's with mixing ethics to this discussion? Do you even know how is their ethos? It is probably different than yours - and not any less valid because of that.

I have a grip I assure you :-)
It seems you don't know a lot about MS' history, you should really read up on that.

[rjamorim]

OK if I change it to "if a wma decoder isn't available", is it then more clear to you what I meant?

Oh, it was clear enough at first time, thank-you.

The problem is that I believe your claim that a decoder might not be available is bullshit. First, because there is already an open source decoder. Second, because that unavailability would imply Microsoft gave up their windows media business and... heh.

But why go through the trouble of reverse engineering something when there are loads of other open formats?

I doubt that anybody will ever need to reverse engineer WMA because Microsoft stopped supporting the format. But, in the very unlikely case that it happens, reverse engineering is a solution.

My point is, possibility of lack of support in the future isn't a good justification to ignore WMA. I defy you to give an example of a popular audio storage format that can't be played anymore. Do you know that wax cylinders can still be played?

People have a choice but they don't necessarily know about it, that's what I'm trying to say.

Then let's educate them. And in an unbiased fashion, not claiming Microsoft is an evil monopoly that wants to bring forth apocalypse.

It seems you don't know a lot about MS' history, you should really read up on that.

Ohh, I do know. I know they are blood thirsty bastards that want a monopoly on everything. And my question is: who doesn't?

I admit I envy them for getting there. Wish the same could happen to me.

[kwanbis]

That is a very pernicious question because, in my current situation, I don't need to thieve, so it's very easy for me to say I wouldn't.

If I was in hunger, or badly needing money because of some emergency, God only knows how my rationalization processes would work. In that situation, I might consider thievery an attractive option.

but that is another situation ... i don't think BG/MS is in a "hungry situation" ...

The important thing here is that MONOPOLYS are bad for all but themselves, whoever the monopoly is .... MICROSOFT, AT&T, SONY, RIA, any MONOPOLY is bad for consumers ... THIS IS THE ONLY IMPORTANT thing to stop.

MONOPOLIES ARE ILIGAL. PERIOD. AND THEY KNOW IT.

This post has been edited by kwanbis: Mar 12 2005, 01:30

[rjamorim]

The important thing here is that MONOPOLYS are bad for all but themselves, whoever the monopoly is .... MICROSOFT, AT&T, SONY, RIA, any MONOPOLY is bad for consumers ... THIS IS THE ONLY IMPORTANT thing to stop.

Agreed. But I definitely won't blame Microsoft for wanting monopolies. That's called ambition, and it's one of the healthiest things a person or company can have, I guarantee you.

When the ambition starts getting out of hand (that's obviously the case with MS), you can't really expect them to see Buddha dancing on their desktops and decide to give peace a chance. The government should step in and force them to take a cold shower. Now, where is the american government?

MONOPOLIES ARE ILIGAL. PERIOD.

Are they? I thought only situations where the consumer is prejudiced are actually illegal. In some situations, the government actually encourages monopolies (mergers, etc.) in order to create strong companies that can compete as multinationals.

Good luck proving Microsoft is prejudicing consumers.

And good luck reading on law. Monopolies aren't necessarily illegal or harmful. They only become illegal once their situation starts to cause harm to consumers.



Also, you have some bad misconceptions. I'm having a hard time finding an area where Sony has a monopoly. MiniDisc? heh.

And the RIAA isn't a monopoly since it isn't a corporation. It's an association of big corporations, but since the individual members retain their financial, legal and determination independency, it can't be considered a syndication or trust.

This post has been edited by rjamorim: Mar 12 2005, 01:41