"Hope is comforting, it allows us to accept fate however tragic it might be."
Lady Yunalesca, Final Fantasy X, PlayStation2.
"Hope is comforting, it allows us to accept fate however tragic it might be."
Lady Yunalesca, Final Fantasy X, PlayStation2.
"- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war."Dibrom, Forum Rules, Hydrogenaudio.org.
"Hope is comforting, it allows us to accept fate however tragic it might be."
Lady Yunalesca, Final Fantasy X, PlayStation2.
"- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war."
Dibrom, Forum Rules, Hydrogenaudio.org.
I'm not creating a flamewar.
Of course, if reality can be offending I'm sorry.
I'm not creating a flamewar.
Of course, if reality can be offending I'm sorry.
There's no problem with
reality. Trouble is, you were spreading
bullshit.
The spread of mp3 as a major lossy audio format had nothing to do with fate.. it was simply logic, which means the people's and companies' choice, based on mp3's capabilities, wide platform support, prices, and marketing. It's not the best format, but it was good enough to succeed, as soon as it came out.
If you think the success of huge standards like cd-audio, or companies such as microsoft, etc. is due to fate, then I'm afraid you didn't understand how this world works. People like you tend to adopt and support stuff just because it's "cool", and by looking at the number of geeks who adpoted it before you - well, but what's the point, if you don't even try and understand how things work ?
If people want something (MPC support) and work hard for it, they'll have it - sooner or later. But if you do nothing, the future won't be shaped according to YOUR vision.
I'm not creating a flamewar.
Of course, if reality can be offending I'm sorry.
I am still not sure what you wanted to say with your statement above ?
Did you reply to my post about 'main hope is on FLAC' for capturing with a lossless audio codec into matroska container ? Rest assured this is far from being fiction anymore. Not more to say for the time being, i dont want to have another 'vaporware' discussion, there had been enough of them in the past already. Those people following our project know its actual status. Those who dont should stop making speculations, but try to inform themselves by reading ( e.g. here : http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video....mcf.general/175 (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mcf.general/175) ), or better be quiet .
If your comment was related to hardware support in MPC, well, dont forget all major japanese hardware manufacturers have announced to support Linux derivates in their next generation units. At least then the iRiver people and all other manufacturers of those portable players should quickly change their minds about making votes to see what else they could do to further improve their profit by selling firmware upgrades, or they'll be gone quicker as anybody can imagine ....
The spread of mp3 as a major lossy audio format had nothing to do with fate.. it was simply logic, which means the people's and companies' choice, based on mp3's capabilities, wide platform support, prices, and marketing. It's not the best format, but it was good enough to succeed, as soon as it came out.
Don't forget MP3 was the first of it's kind. If WMA, MP3 and OGG was all released in 1996, I'm quite sure MP3 wouldn't be the format sitting in every electronic device today.
If you think the success of huge standards like cd-audio, or companies such as microsoft, etc. is due to fate, then I'm afraid you didn't understand how this world works.
CD-audio was a hit because it was miles ahead of regular tapes, and it was marketed and distributed by major worldwide commercial companies. Is MPC miles ahead of MP3 (which is perceived as CD-quality to the majority)
People like you tend to adopt and support stuff just because it's "cool", and by looking at the number of geeks who adpoted it before you - well, but what's the point, if you don't even try and understand how things work?
Wrong. You're assuming things. I was among the first to use MP3, and made my first encodings back in 1996 or 1997 with L3enc.exe in DOS mode. I switched to Ogg Vorbis in may 2002.
Also, people will have a hard time seeing MPC as "cool" since they consider 128k MP3 to be CD-quality, so for them MPC just equals to increasing the filesize 30% and restricting the rips to only be played in Windows using WinAmp (or Foobar if they know about it).
If people want something (MPC support) and work hard for it, they'll have it - sooner or later.
How are you working except joining together on HydrogenAudio and praising the audioformat?
Don't expect Joe Average to launch AOL 6.0 and go to www.hydrogenaudio.org ...
The pessimist complains about the wind,
The optimist expects it to change,
The realist adjust the sails.
Now I see a lot of optimists, but I'm curious what you do to change the wind?
Don't forget MP3 was the first of it's kind. If WMA, MP3 and OGG was all released in 1996, I'm quite sure MP3 wouldn't be the format sitting in every electronic device today.
About mp3 - here's what I said: "it was good enough to succeed, as soon as it came out". That also meant it came out soon.
About the other formats - I'm not sure that an early WMA appearance would have done much good to the users.. see the DVD+ vs DVD- waste, for example.
CD-audio was a hit because it was miles ahead of regular tapes, and it was marketed and distributed by major worldwide commercial companies.
Well, yeah. I don't see where fate would kick in.
Also, people will have a hard time seeing MPC as "cool" since they consider 128k MP3 to be CD-quality, so for them MPC just equals to increasing the filesize 30% and restricting the rips to only be played in Windows using WinAmp (or Foobar if they know about it).
Incorrect !!! Those people listen to mp3's using small computer speakers, and to cd's using their home stereo. Even if they can't tell 128kbps mp3 from a cd on their pc, they perfectly know that it's much better to listen to a CD on good equipment - and they don't listen to music on the computer, when they do have the original cd.
So if you offer them true CD quality of 8 cd's on a single one, that they can play on the home stereo, they'll like it.
How are you working except joining together on HydrogenAudio and praising the audioformat?
Well in the MPC realm, not much... but at least, I'm not wasting my time spreading controversy.
Don't expect Joe Average to launch AOL 6.0 and go to www.hydrogenaudio.org ...
You'd be surprised. I know many people who read HA.org, and can't rip a cd nor install an OS.
The pessimist complains about the wind,
The optimist expects it to change,
The realist adjust the sails.
How boring. Hope it enlightens your life though.
Now I see a lot of optimists, but I'm curious what you do to change the wind?
Plenty of things already. Yet nothing in audio for now, that's all.
I see alot of wind blowing in here...
I see alot of wind blowing in here...
Indeed. We're trying to wipe doubts away
About the other formats - I'm not sure that an early WMA appearance would have done much good to the users.. see the DVD+ vs DVD- waste, for example.
Where's the waste? It's a war. DVD-R was first, and to me it looks like the winner. I know 4 people with a DVD burner. Three of them has a Pioneer drive (DVD-R), and last one a SuperDrive (made by Pioneer - DVD-R).
Well, yeah. I don't see where fate would kick in.
Fate was Yunalescas word. In this case, reality would probably be a suitable replacement.
It looks like some members here thinks that 50 people sending an e-mail to iRivers support-center or a bunch of petitions with 100-200 signatures is going to change MPC support upside down. Furthermore, a few people believes that other companies use iRiver as guidance, so if iRiver supports MPC, all others will follow. Some people think that the reason why people don't use MPC, is because they don't know about it. Yes and no. I know about MPC, but do I use it?
Incorrect !!! Those people listen to mp3's using small computer speakers, and to cd's using their home stereo. Even if they can't tell 128kbps mp3 from a cd on their pc, they perfectly know that it's much better to listen to a CD on good equipment - and they don't listen to music on the computer, when they do have the original cd.
I see a lot of DVD-players and homestereoes supporting MP3. I haven't heard anyone but the HydrogenAudio people complain about MP3-files on homestereos.
My brother has a $3000 homestereo set. He rips in Ogg Vorbis, 96 kbit.
But of course, we're just a deaf family with flawed hearing - no?
Well in the MPC realm, not much... but at least, I'm not wasting my time spreading controversy.
If people want something (MPC support) and work hard for it, they'll have it - sooner or later. But if you do nothing, the future won't be shaped according to YOUR vision. How boring. Hope it enlightens your life though.
It does.
Plenty of things already. Yet nothing in audio for now, that's all.
??
As soon as all of the patent issues are cleared up, I can't see too many obstacles facing MPC hardware support. I doubt a decoder requires substantial memory space, and I know that it doesn't require much processing power. You can't tell me that the average portable player made in 2005 will not have the technical capabilities to play MPC along with AAC, Vorbis, and MP3. All that's needed is a reasonable amount of consumer demand.
And that demand exists, it's just not focused. Ask a DJ sometime about MP3. They hate it, because it smears the absolutely vital sharp transients that are a cornerstone of techno. Most of them don't know about LAME, or alt-presets, or anything like that. They just know that MP3 sucks and turns a hyperactive hihat track into a tinny swoosh noise. They'd be more than happy to use something that promised +99% transparency, and they'd pay money for it.
I DJ doesn't want MPC, he wants lossless I think.
And I'm not sure that DJ is the core target group of the new latest iPod or Rio...
Where's the waste? It's a war. DVD-R was first, and to me it looks like the winner. I know 4 people with a DVD burner. Three of them has a Pioneer drive (DVD-R), and last one a SuperDrive (made by Pioneer - DVD-R).
Well, I do use DVD-R and think it's the best and most compatible write-once DVD format. So what ? Most set-top burners are +RW, because of the nice rewriting capabilities (DVD-RW is a joke). We might need DVD-RAM too. Result: There's no single burner which takes them all. Bad for the consumer, I suppose.
The Panasonic LF-521 does -R/RW and -RAM, but lacks +R/+RW. The new Sony does it all, but not -RAM. See ?
Fate was Yunalescas word. In this case, reality would probably be a suitable replacement.
Hardly a synonym.
It looks like some members here thinks that 50 people sending an e-mail to iRivers support-center or a bunch of petitions with 100-200 signatures is going to change MPC support upside down.
I don't recall mentioning it - but anyway, signing a suggestion for mpc support can't be bad. The codec is ready, working great - so a 1st step won't hurt. Btw, if you know so much better, I guess you're welcome to enlighten people here.
Furthermore, a few people believes that other companies use iRiver as guidance, so if iRiver supports MPC, all others will follow.
It would encourage others to follow, yes. You don't agree with that ?
Some people think that the reason why people don't use MPC, is because they don't know about it. Yes and no. I know about MPC, but do I use it?
Can't tell. It depends on your needs, I suppose. At least you'd have one less argument for not using it, now that it's open-source.
I see a lot of DVD-players and homestereoes supporting MP3. I haven't heard anyone but the HydrogenAudio people complain about MP3-files on homestereos.
Well, I was talking with a friend yesterday, and he asked me why the mp3 cd's played on his new dvd player, sounded like crap...
Turned out they were 160kbps Blade encoded, and he didn't like the sound at all. Now, for 160kbps you can have transparent sound, which is the reason why I think better formats are to be added on newer devices. That's all.
By the way, I simply don't enjoy the lack of sharpness of the mp3 format, from several cd's which are mostly gothic Metal, punk etc. I'm talking about relaxed listening, which doesn't prevent easy 25/25 ABX tests without training. So, yes, there's a significant difference which is present all the time (even if you cannot always hear it). This simple fact pushes me away from transform codecs, how about that.
My brother has a $3000 homestereo set. He rips in Ogg Vorbis, 96 kbit.
96 kbps Vorbis, does that shock you ? There will probably be more audible distorsion caused by his loudspeakers, than audible distorsion caused by the Vorbis codec. So no, I'm not shocked at all.
But of course, we're just a deaf family with flawed hearing - no?
I won't bother answering this one.
??
Well I have some interest in audio coding, but also in 3d routines, cryptography, digital image processing, compression etc.
One can't do everything I suppose
I am still not sure what you wanted to say with your statement above ?
'Long live the fish' was the real message, I
assume.
Although I don't see the reason for vorbis supporterz to be offended everytime non-vorbis topic is being discussed.
Don't forget MP3 was the first of it's kind. If WMA, MP3 and OGG was all released in 1996, I'm quite sure MP3 wouldn't be the format sitting in every electronic device today.
So what's sitting in your VCR? Is it VHS or BETA? (Or the VCR you had before you tossed it in the dumpster.)
"Hope is comforting, it allows us to accept fate however tragic it might be."
Lady Yunalesca, Final Fantasy X, PlayStation2.
"- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war."
Dibrom, Forum Rules, Hydrogenaudio.org.
I'm not creating a flamewar.
Of course, if reality can be offending I'm sorry.
No, what's offending is your spamming (yes, your post was useless spam), your blatant disregard for the forum rules (this is not the first time), and your general attitude (as seen on this board, and on others).
It looks like some members here thinks that 50 people sending an e-mail to iRivers support-center or a bunch of petitions with 100-200 signatures is going to change MPC support upside down. Furthermore, a few people believes that other companies use iRiver as guidance, so if iRiver supports MPC, all others will follow.
What do you care what MPC users do anyway? Personally, I find it unlikely to see proprietary hardware support by portable manufacturers before SV8 is out and patent issues have been cleared.
It may even be that portable manufacturers like iRiver never support MPC, but it still doesn't mean that there won't ever be portable support. There's already fixed point MPC decoder for ARMv4, so support for many PDAs is available.
Heck, it may be possible to play MPC already with iPOD, while it's still atm. impossible for Vorbis. (check this (http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,57565,00.html) out).
My brother has a $3000 homestereo set. He rips in Ogg Vorbis, 96 kbit.
But of course, we're just a deaf family with flawed hearing - no?
Well, if you think 96kbps Vorbis is even near hi-fi quality, you definitely are very badly deaf.
I doubt a decoder requires substantial memory space, and I know that it doesn't require much processing power. You can't tell me that the average portable player made in 2005 will not have the technical capabilities to play MPC along with AAC, Vorbis, and MP3. All that's needed is a reasonable amount of consumer demand.
More than not needing "much" processing power, I'd say it doesn't need "a crap" of a processing power...my Duron 800 decodes, with the last decoder version, at around 90x or more...so, with those silly fast calculations, it only seems to need about 10-12 MHz to decode real-time (on a computer). With 90Mhz overpowered CD players like iRiver's you can decode it almost before reading the CD track... .
" The iPod was a present from Leach's girlfriend, who forbade him from taking it apart and "ruining it." So Leach had to figure out its inner workings by examining the operating system code, line by line. "
thank heaven for women
Well, if you think 96kbps Vorbis is even near hi-fi quality, you definitely are very badly deaf.
Now you just need the "I see deaf people" quote in your signature.
Seriously, John. You have to respect that not all people are as picky as you, and I haven't met (met = in reality) one person who could tell a 96 kbps Vorbis rip from the CD.
I usually can't tell a 80 kbit Vorbis rip from the CD.
By saying me and my brother are deaf when we can't seperate a 96 kbps from an uncompressed CD recording, you're basicly saying 95%+ of the worlds electronic consumers are deaf...
My "pickiness" starts above 160kbps average, pretty much for any codec. Vorbis default is 112kbps nominal -q3. Based on comments what I have read all around and read in #vorbis and vorbis mailinglist, I don't agree at all with your estimation that 95%+ of vorbis users can't distinguish 96kbps nominal from CD.
"Hope is comforting, it allows us to accept fate however tragic it might be."
Lady Yunalesca, Final Fantasy X, PlayStation2.
"- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war."
Dibrom, Forum Rules, Hydrogenaudio.org.
I'm not creating a flamewar.
Of course, if reality can be offending I'm sorry.
No, what's offending is your spamming (yes, your post was useless spam), your blatant disregard for the forum rules (this is not the first time), and your general attitude (as seen on this board, and on others).
If you were wise, you would counter-attack my statement and come up with realistic arguments on WHY iRiver should support the musepack format. It's best to be realistic in hopes and ambisions.
Who would want to support the Musepack format? Who could find a commercial benefit in supporting and marketing their product with Musepack support?
Everyone or iRiver isn't the answer, and writing an e-mail saying "me and my three buddies are gonna buy X-player if it supports MPC which is a cool high quality codec" isn't the road ahead either. Yay, four additional units sold. Listen, that's not gonna justify the expenses and engineering in introducing Musepack support.
Also, stop bothering the customer support - your e-mails go into the trashbin after being replied to with a "Sorry Sir, we do not plan to support x-codec anytime soon". I think you should try to find the boss of the product development staff, then contact him/her, and tell them, that you've researched the subject, and you know say 800.000 homestereos which is rated "Audiophile Quality" by some magazine, a certification-group or some creditable source was sold in 2002. Then maybe if you have some consumer demographics from a research company, that says that maybe 64% of the people who rate them self as "concerned" or "very concerned" about the quality of their audioequipment also own a computer. Figures like these should work.
I don't know where to find statistics like these. But I think solid arranged evidence of a consumergroup would work much better than "I would like mpc support" mails.
Think about it. I'm not against Musepack at all, but I don't believe naive threads and e-mail to various customer supports around the globe will do the trick.
Again - I repeat - I'm not creating a flamewar, and I'm disappointed to see that you think so.
My "pickiness" starts above 160kbps average, pretty much for any codec. Vorbis default is 112kbps nominal -q3. Based on comments what I have read all around and read in #vorbis and vorbis mailinglist, I don't agree at all with your estimation that 95%+ of vorbis users can't distinguish 96kbps nominal from CD.
95%+ of vorbis users can't distinguish 96kbps nominal from CD.
1) This was a quick estimation. It could as well be 80%, 85% or 90%.
2) I was not talking about vorbis users. By saying vorbis users you are already estimating about a very specific and quite small consumer segment. I was talking about the general electronic consumers. This basicly includes anyone who owns a device capable of playing music in this subject. A discman, an MP3 player, a taperecorder, anything. In fact a huge segment of the western world. I mean, even my grandmother who is 74 years old, she owns a CD-player.
I wouldn't say that 95%+ of consumers can't distinguish 96kbps Vorbis from CD, simply because most just don't care whether they distinguish or not. Maybe 50-60% of all consumers or even more could if they tried or cared enough.
Excuse me but I just don't get why a first post like that (from MadiZone) has recieved answers regarding audio issues. As far as my limited intelligence allows me, he was obviously trying to start a thread regarding the sophism that lies into the Final Fantasy series and I totally agree with his excellent observation. You should also try to play Chrono Trigger for even more witty statements...
Excuse me but I just don't get why a first post like that (from MadiZone) has recieved answers regarding audio issues. As far as my limited intelligence allows me, he was obviously trying to start a thread regarding the sophism that lies into the Final Fantasy series and I totally agree with his excellent observation. You should also try to play Chrono Trigger for even more witty statements...
Lady Yunalesca is incredibly beautiful and sophisticated, I'm glad you recognize that .
note : it was a quote posted in the MPC forum regarding hardware support. I was just using Yunalesca's quote. Some people found it offending, some mod splitted the thread.
I wouldn't say that 95%+ of consumers can't distinguish 96kbps Vorbis from CD, simply because most just don't care whether they distinguish or not. Maybe 50-60% of all consumers or even more could if they tried or cared enough.
And there we got another obstacle.
Why would a commercial company want to support a high quality audioformat if it's consumersegment doesn't care about quality at all?
And "they're stupid" is not the answer.
Ok, some people are spending way too much time playing video games to be arguing about reality!
If there is a market for SACD and DVD-A (formats that probably only 1% of people, if any, could abx), there is certainly a market for mpc. The market is called: audiophiles, and if the mpc format was marketed correctly, there is no reason why it couldn't work. Of course, the promotion of DVDA and SACD have ulterior motives, and whether anyone will bother promoting a HQ format without odius DRM is a question that depends on whether you think the glass is half-empty or half-full.
Lady Yunalesca is incredibly beautiful and sophisticated, I'm glad you recognize that
Erm. No. She does not exist. Thus, she can be neither. The artists who drew her created an image that they attempted to make beautiful, and the writers who wrote her dialogue attempted to portray her as sophisticated.
If you wish to quote a videogame character, quote the author who wrote the dialogue. If that name doesn't resonate, there's likely a reason for it.
When people hear "higher quality!!!" they think "ooh better!!!". MPC is teh higher quality. So iRiver can say "hey look we got teh higher quality!!!" and the customers will say "ooh i want teh higher quality!!!" and they'll buy it.
It's not hard to get people to want teh better quality. I have a few friends who used to just indiscriminately download MP3's, knowing that it's better to get 192k than 128k, and that's about it. I just played a 128k file, and then a rip of the CD with MPC Standard, and I said "look at teh higher quality!!11!!1!" and they said "yeh i see it!!!11!1!" and now they rip all their music with MPC.
MPC isn't as obscure as you think. Go to many other techie forums (Ars Technica for one), and even there a few people always say "rip CD's with MPC for teh higher quality!!!" whenever someone asks about audio. And if iRiver was the only company to support MPC-CD playback, they'd get thousands of sales, just for that reason. I mean, many of the active members at HA would run out and get one (myself included), plus many of HA members' friends and family members would get them too, plus all those thousands of people at other tech forums and their friends and family. And of course, anyone who's buying an audio player as a gift will look at the iRiver box and notice the big shiny seal that says "We got Musepack it is teh higher quality!!! MP3 ist death!", and maybe buy it for that reason too.
iRiver has two paths it can take when implementing MPC. It can release an unsupported patch which some programmer can slap together in not-too-long a time, which will be cheap to make and cost nothing to support, and will generate a few thousand sales from the enthusiast crowd. Or it can do heavier development, testing, promotion, and support, and make it a real selling feature.
Okay I'm out!
Lady Yunalesca is incredibly beautiful and sophisticated, I'm glad you recognize that
Erm. No. She does not exist. Thus, she can be neither. The artists who drew her created an image that they attempted to make beautiful, and the writers who wrote her dialogue attempted to portray her as sophisticated.
If you wish to quote a videogame character, quote the author who wrote the dialogue. If that name doesn't resonate, there's likely a reason for it.
Wrong. You're basicly saying you have to be a world famous person, otherwise your comments are not worth a dime.
Just like you can post movie quotes, you can post videogame quotes, and you credit them to the fictional character.
But go to the biggest database on movies (and now videogames) and look :
http://us.imdb.com/Quotes?0284110 (http://us.imdb.com/Quotes?0284110)
Just where do you see
"Listen to my story, for I may not get another chance to tell it."
- John Brengman, Dialogue editor of Final Fantasy X.
The correct way of quoting it, is to quote it to the fictional character it belongs to.
Lara Croft is fictional as well, but she still has a surprisingly huge fanbase. (not that I'm one of them)
I don't see a lot of fans to are members of "The fanclub for the 3D Character Designer at Core Entertainment"
When people hear "higher quality!!!" they think "ooh better!!!". MPC is teh higher quality. So iRiver can say "hey look we got teh higher quality!!!" and the customers will say "ooh i want teh higher quality!!!" and they'll buy it.
It's not hard to get people to want teh better quality. I have a few friends who used to just indiscriminately download MP3's, knowing that it's better to get 192k than 128k, and that's about it. I just played a 128k file, and then a rip of the CD with MPC Standard, and I said "look at teh higher quality!!11!!1!" and they said "yeh i see it!!!11!1!" and now they rip all their music with MPC.
MPC isn't as obscure as you think. Go to many other techie forums (Ars Technica for one), and even there a few people always say "rip CD's with MPC for teh higher quality!!!" whenever someone asks about audio. And if iRiver was the only company to support MPC-CD playback, they'd get thousands of sales, just for that reason. I mean, many of the active members at HA would run out and get one (myself included), plus many of HA members' friends and family members would get them too, plus all those thousands of people at other tech forums and their friends and family. And of course, anyone who's buying an audio player as a gift will look at the iRiver box and notice the big shiny seal that says "We got Musepack it is teh higher quality!!! MP3 ist death!", and maybe buy it for that reason too.
iRiver has two paths it can take when implementing MPC. It can release an unsupported patch which some programmer can slap together in not-too-long a time, which will be cheap to make and cost nothing to support, and will generate a few thousand sales from the enthusiast crowd. Or it can do heavier development, testing, promotion, and support, and make it a real selling feature.
Okay I'm out!
again. Go this forum, go that forum.
No. You go there, count the amount of people who is showing interest in Musepack, then count how many you think would be interested in an iRiver device if it supported musepack, and finally how many that you know for sure would buy the iRiver.
If consumers want higher quality, how come all these people rip at 128 kbit?
They think 128 kbit the maximum bitrate for the MP3 format?
That doesn't really make sense.
Of these people who download a 192 kbit rip instead of a 128 kbit rip, how many of them rip music them self?
Because if they have no MPC track to play - and currently, they're not getting any from KaZaa - what use would they have of MPC support? And these people, do they already own an iRiver or are they thinking about buying one? Maybe they think about getting a player if it had musepack, but how do we make them know that our player has musepack then? It's not like we have their e-mail adress and can just magicly let them know. Of course, we could trust that the HydrogenAudio forum and it's members would spread the news. But how many hifi-consumers interested in portables go HydrogenAudio or just forums in general?
Maybe they read the magazines for reviews instead.... or maybe they just go to their local electronics store to find a player that suits them.... If they just go to their local store, then the obvious way to get the message out about the Musepack support would be to have all packaging and manuals edited and reprinted and then send out to the distributors. But what about the units they already have? Should they be returned to be repackaged as well? Because they HAVE to know that it's there.
iRiver doesn't care if a lot of people like high quality audio. They care about if there's a significant consumersegment who cares about high quality, knows about musepack, knows about iRivers existance and have MPC support as their crucial criteria for placing a purchase on an iRiver player.
If's and possibly's are not of much use.
It's commercial speculation. If you can garantee that musepack support would be a commercial success or has a significant chance of becoming one, then you have a good chance of convincing the higher orders in iRiver.
Try to estimate a sales number, and try to estimate how much iRivers earns pr. unit they sell to the distributor. Now try to estimate what kind of licensing there could be involved (Í've never seen the MPC licensing thing clarified completely), and how much engineeringtime is needed. What the risks if using the format would be? I mean, could the owner of MPC come in 5 years, when iRiver has helped the format grow bigger and then raise the license price? Would loading an MPC decoder into the memory of the player, cause the player to start slower? Or consume more battery because more memory will be used?
How would the current customers like this?
A lot of questions.
This thread is teh low quality!!1!1~!!
This thread is teh low quality!!1!1~!!
If that's the best reason you can come up with, no wonder why Musepack is yet to be supported.
You need to lighten up, dude. Seriously.
You say you're not against Musepack at all, yet you seem hell bent on seeing it not supported in any hardware whatsoever. Give me a break.
You need to lighten up, dude. Seriously.
You say you're not against Musepack at all, yet you seem hell bent on seeing it not supported in any hardware whatsoever. Give me a break.
Wrong.
I'm mainly pointing out some of the issues, that people seem to completely ignore, either because they've forgot them, or because they think if they're not brought up - they're obviously not issues.
If you refuse to acknowledge reality, you're gonna have a hard time changing it.
And that's what the quote was all about.
"Hope is comforting" - It's comforting to believe that MPC support is around the corner.
"It helps us accept fate (reality)" - there is no MPC support.
"however tragic it might be" - and it's not coming.
You have to stop dreaming, and start doing something...
Or
hope (
expect) (
know) someone else will do it for you.
Again - I'm not against Musepack.
Oh well... is 'slapping a patch' costly?
Do you know about 'snowball effect'?
(One has it, his friends have it, friends of his friend, 10000 people use it...)
Without risk there is no gain! (In buissness at least)
If NOBODY tried to implement MP3 in hardware,
we would have no MP3/CD players.
Oh well... is 'slapping a patch' costly?
Do you know about 'snowball effect'?
(One has it, his friends have it, friends of his friend, 10000 people use it...)
Without risk there is no gain! (In buissness at least)
If NOBODY tried to implement MP3 in hardware,
we would have no MP3/CD players.
No one implemented MP3 before it was significantly known.
This mean, by the time the first MP3 player came out, MP3 was already very known across geeks.
Nearly every PC magazine had covered the subject in one or more articles, many websites hosted software for download that would allow you to create your own MP3 files.
Furthermore, MP3 established a new market.
It had nothing to compete closely with. It had the CD player, but there was no format to compete with. Not even RealAudio was a serious threat. Musepack has a format to compete with. The MP3 format, a format that is already WIDELY ESTABLISHED. If we rid the world of MP3, re-launched Napster, and made sure all the available CD-rippers had Musepack as default option, I could tell you for sure, that MPC hardware support was coming.
I know about the snowball effect, but keep in mind. Why me and you might be dazzled by the quality of Musepack, our friends might be more like "yea, that's cool - I'll use it", and some of their friends will be like "hmm, nice, but it doesn't have support - I'll stick to MP3, because I'm a bloody conservative".
So I think we should call it an echo effect rather than a snowball effect.
OK enough is enough...
As said before "you need to lighten up dude"!
And indeed this thread is teh low quality...it's going completely nowhere, started from nowhere too.
MadiZone, instead of trying to come up with every possible reason in the world why MusePack hardware support won't happen [span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](soon, not soon, whatever)[/span] and trying to make people think as (extremely) passimistically as you [span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](and i thought I was pretty passimistic sometimes..)[/span] just lighten up and face the fact that things are not so simple, things happen because of different reasons all the time, no matter what imaginitive "rules" you think there are.
I say MPC support in portable/s will exist, don't know when, but when it will i'm very likely to buy the device.
regardless of MPC, i belive that someday we will have an open source firmware player, someone will have to fill that gap in the market sometime... the rest will be up to us.
Final Fantasy died with FF6, idiot.
Anything after 6 is bastardized because they're PSX-only releases.
MPC is great and it'll see the light, I think. Digital audio is progressing slowly, because of cheap sh!ts in the RIAA and elsewhere. But they can't halt development altogether. People are still opening their ears everywhere.
for neo: http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff7/propag...ganda/junon.jpg (http://www.rpgamer.com/games/ff/ff7/propaganda/junon.jpg)
(server doesnt like external links i think, try pasting the url in new ie window)
I play games for gameplay, not cinematics, dumbass.
And in any case, haven't you noticed how generic the FF series is since FF6?
"Ooh, look at me, I've got an odd hairstyle, and what's this, a BIG SWORD? Ooh pretty..."
and whats your problem with ff7/8/9 gameplay ? or maybe they're too big to download on your gay modem ?
That is REAL flamewar
(Actually, I don't like FF too much too. It's a good game, but not my style.)
Lol.. this is teh low quality thread of the week if not the month..
Several people acting against the rules of HydrogenAudio... I don't think this thread needs to be open anymore. Closed.