I'm planning to buy a PDA and I'd like to fit as much of my music in the limited space available. I would rather not rip my CD again (and again). I thought I might re-encode the MP3's I have already ripped. Since these are all lossy encoding, the quality will suffer even more. So which would be better, re-encoding to MP3 or to OGG (when a OGG player is available) or WMA?

Thanks for the input.

Well, considering the limited space on your PDA (how many MB?), you will probably want to re-encode at the lowest possible bitrate which is still tolerable. If you only have 32-64MB, fitting a 1-2 hours of music will require a bitrate of about 64kbps. At that bitrate, Ogg Vorbis definitely beats Lame and WMA for almost all music types. If your PDA supports MP3Pro playback, that might sound a bit better to you than Ogg Vorbis at 64kbps. But if your only two choices are plain-MP3 and WMA... you're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Personally if I was in that situation I'd just store the original MP3's and listen to the same 20 minutes of music over and over, rather than listen to an hour of recompressed-audio noise in a continuous loop.

I'd almost be tempted to use 64kbps 22khz mp3's; they wouldn't have the horrible artifacts the wma 44khz would have.

Thanks for the input. Does re-encoding in the same format (MP3) lower quality more than re-encoding in another format (OGG)? Does anyone know of a good Pocket PC OGG player that isn't still in beta?

Dunno if its still in beta, but its very good, its called PocketMVP