Once again yet another unrelated "professional analysis". This thread was not meant to discuss Musepack's popularity, competition with other codecs, people's preferences and so on. 1. bla-bla2. Do you think only "those who have plenty of storage space" use Musepack? Are those people ones with hundreds of gigabytes? The --standard preset's avarage bitrate is around 176kbps, meaning higher quality at lower size than any competition.
a few other ideas/projects are slowly being worked on (seeking/etc) but nothing to write home about...
musepack will always have a user base due to the 1,000's of GB of musepack audio files out there...
the format isn't abandoned.
the thread-of-the-week-proclaiming-musepack-dead just isn't adding anything new to the situation.
hows that new PC going?
It's a bit off-topic, but if lucid anti-mpc zealot wants to have fun, here's another hilarious claim coming from the musepack.net circus board.QuoteOnce again yet another unrelated "professional analysis". This thread was not meant to discuss Musepack's popularity, competition with other codecs, people's preferences and so on. 1. bla-bla2. Do you think only "those who have plenty of storage space" use Musepack? Are those people ones with hundreds of gigabytes? The --standard preset's avarage bitrate is around 176kbps, meaning higher quality at lower size than any competition.sourceThe MPC "developer" explicitely ask to not discuss about "competition with other codecs", but four lines after the disclaimer - ding!- a clear statement about MPC superiority. Superiority at 176 [!--sizeo:1--][span style=\"font-size:8pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--](wow, that is precise)[/size] kbps, precisely where complete listening tests are missing... and this guy blames the few members of this board for their "professional analysis".But this is just a snack. The big one is coming just after : [!--sizeo:3--][span style=\"font-size:12pt;line-height:100%\"][!--/sizeo--]3. If you think Musepack is "losing" anything, all the statistics such as the tens of thousands of new visitors to our site each month, increasing usage and discussion of the format all over by users satisfied by the format's top quality, many major companies' interest in our files, Musepack being the top pick other than the popular MP3 according to a Hydrogenaudio survey, being supported by popular software on every possible widely used (and some not so widely used) platform and gaining further support by many unique and new applications, etc, shows otherwise.[/size](I recall that this message was posted less than one year ago).• "increase discussion of the format": may I recall why this topic was started? Note that the last message posted on musepack.net is also more than one month old.• "many major companies interest in our files": too bad that he forgot to name these "big companies". We can't mail them to recall them to support MPC • "...on top (...) according to a Hydrogenaudio survey": here is the lastest poll, MPC is in fourth position, with 11% of use, very far from Vorbis (and MP3 of course). And to finish, a last indicator of MPC growing interest• "being supported by popular software on every possible widely used": no, MPC is supported in popular softwares, and not by them. The compatibility is most often coming from third-party components; native support of MPC is very rare.Priceless, isn't it ?
Quote from: xmixahlx on 08 August, 2006, 04:14:53 PMa few other ideas/projects are slowly being worked on (seeking/etc) but nothing to write home about...seeking? That's indeed a great project! But didn't you consider seeking as useless
Quotemusepack will always have a user base due to the 1,000's of GB of musepack audio files out there...Ah, I see... so MPC is basically attractive for illegal usage? That's indeed a great argument in favor of keeping MPC boards on HA.org.
Quotethe format isn't abandoned.No, but quality improvement (precisely for what people were looking about when they choose to leave MP3 for an exotic format) is more than dormant I would say.
Quotethe thread-of-the-week-proclaiming-musepack-dead just isn't adding anything new to the situation.Yes, it did: it contributed to clean HA.org board a bit in the last hours Finally, MPC is still useful for something else than P2P
no. just like every other format doesn't exist solely for illegal usage. i have about 100GB of legal live music in musepack format, for instance - but thanks for another obviously ignorant point.
you aren't adding anything new here... everyone can see (musepack is open source now) that the psymodel isn't evolving. those same people can see that usability is evolving (especially for *NIX). how you can make those well-understood ideas an argument is interesting.
it's easy to guess that MPC won't progress anymore and will only survive by trying to maintain an "audiophile superiority" aura obtained somewhere during 2000 and 2001 and objectively lost in the meantime. Such attitude could only fool new and uninformed users. There's no place for marketing on this board - even if it comes from an open-source software.
guruboolez, assuming MPC is dead, then you're a necrophiliac. Don't make me close the thread, guys.
you are not obligated to read the MPC forum, you know?
Whatever the format, as long as mythologic arguments will be posted on this board, I will continue to fight them to my best of my ability and my knowledge.
and do you read it ?
And perhaps the mods can put a deadline for MPC subforum dissolution...say, at end of the year, December 2006, they'll move it to the general audio codecs forum unless by some miracle, some astonishingly great developments in MPC land come to fruition (which will, of course, require defining). Just another suggestion for compromise on this hot, touchy topic.
well just to be precise, it was me who said that mpc is dead.. so it would be more accurate to call myself the necrophiliac but..
we all know, that using mpc leads nowhere nowdays, so why bother with MPC forum when no one really needs it?
The quotes you posted here come from a different forum.
What i find strange is the effort you put in, gathering statistics about forum section usage and so on.
P.S. With Necrophiliac i meant someone who rapes something that is "dead".
Building support for Commodore 64 and Atari ST is not exactly the kind of argument users are waiting for.BTW, no need watch the source to see that MPC isn't progressing. VQF is still closed source and everyone can guess that the format is dead.
The corpse is only moving by the energy of small worms
It's open-source, or "Code it and add it yourself if you're unhappy". For some people, wide decoding support is important. It certainly was for me. Libmpcdec works on almost every known platform. Mplayer and VLC added support for it. I know I will not depend anymore on some winamp plugins to listen to mpc files on linux.
While I don't necessarily agree with how the site is currently handled, I also find the current 'anti-mpc' crusade on HA pointless.
Deleting the forums can't be backed up by any valid argument.
Quote from: guruboolez on 08 August, 2006, 07:00:23 PMThe corpse is only moving by the energy of small wormsThanks
Do you know any reason to keep a forum if you and all other persons are not really contributing to stay active? Personnaly, I don't.
Quote from: guruboolez on 08 August, 2006, 07:17:57 PMDo you know any reason to keep a forum if you and all other persons are not really contributing to stay active? Personnaly, I don't.As a knowledge repository. I don't see the advantage of taking it out. By the way, never used, probably never will use MPC.
What kind of knowledge should members expect from messages posted in 2002 about outdated versions of an unsignificant format?Anyway, there's no need to delete the archive. MPC messages could easily be moved into the 'other formats' compost. Such massive transfer from one forum to another wont hurt the current aspect of the new forum, because most MPC threads will immediately sink into the depths of this section. Ratworms interested by old MPC debates would easily found them whatever the section they are stored.