__/ [ Peter Köhlmann ] on Sunday 19 March 2006 07:59 \__
> Tim Smith wrote:
>> In article <dvihj9$2tem$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I agree. This also makes one wonder about Windows Media Audio, which some
>>> MP3 players support nowadays, at an embedded level. Why even let a new
>>> format emerge when a perfectly-legit and standardised/commonly-used one
>>> exists already? Same situation with video codecs. It's a lockin attempt.
>> There are several reasons for other formats.
>> (1) Freedom. MP3 is not free. Hence, the need for Ogg Vorbis.
> Which is not DRMed
>> (2) Sound quality. At a given bitrate, you can do better than MP3. Ogg
>> and AAC both usually beat MP3 in listening tests at a given bitrate.
> All of which are not DRMed
>> (3) DRM. The owners of most of the content won't release it for
>> download without DRM. Hence, the need for a format that supports DRM.
> Too bad for them. I have already decided that I will buy *no* music which
> is in whichever way hampered by DRM. So no iTunes type downloads. No
> copyprotected CDs. Ever
> If they are intent of not selling music without bullying me around, I am
> afraid they have to eat their shit. I will not buy it
I second that statement; particularly so because DRM affects genuine
customers. It is unacceptable when someone buys media which cannot be played
in the car, or on the computer (among other so-called 'old-tech' devices).
Not even a refund is permitted under such circumstances. Genuine, benevolent
buyers are forced to get fed with inconveniences that may not be fully
comprehended, until a few years down the line.
...and oh, yeah! I can still play my parent's platters from the 70's. No need
for specialised hardware either.
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: sheep outnumber people in NZ
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
8:00am up 11 days 0:37, 10 users, load average: 1.40, 0.94, 0.79
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine