Would it not be better for itunes to have the ability to convert wma into aac or mp3 rather than not support it at all?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
HP: No WMA for iPod
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: Re: Missing the Point?
But, just like in the previous thread, the lossy vs lossless issue is irrelevant. The issue here is whether or not Apple should support WMA ***on the iPod***. Nobody is going to sell downloadable songs in a lossless format and nobody is going to put them on a portable player. At least, not given the current state of those respective technologies (ie bandwith & storage).
Your point about the lack of support for lossless compression is valid with respect to iTunes, but is off-topic in this or any other "WMA on iPod" thread.
But, just like in the previous thread, the lossy vs lossless issue is irrelevant. The issue here is whether or not Apple should support WMA ***on the iPod***. Nobody is going to sell downloadable songs in a lossless format and nobody is going to put them on a portable player. At least, not given the current state of those respective technologies (ie bandwith & storage).
Your point about the lack of support for lossless compression is valid with respect to iTunes, but is off-topic in this or any other "WMA on iPod" thread.
Sorry to be rude, but this logic doesn't make sense. As you've pointed out, AACs that are on the iTunes music store do sound great on iPods and most stereos. The FEW people (and I emphasize few because, despite their vocal presence in certain areas, they really are a TINY proportion of the music-buying public) who take such pride in impeccable audio quality probably aren't buying from the iTMS anyway. They're willing to spend the few extra bucks to get a tangible good (a CD, with liner notes, cover art, etc.) that they can enjoy on high-end equipment. I'd say, of the tiny percentage who already value high-end audio, a similarly tiny percentage of them have interest in getting "high-res" audio off the Internet.
128kbps AAC is "good enough," the practically trademarked term for all "consumer-level" products and services. There will always be a few who appreciate the high-end, and usually are willing and able to pay for it. However, as is often the case, entire markets cannot and do not bend to the whims of those who demand high-end. If they demand it, they'll pay for it. It's cheap (nay, free) for Apple to implement the codecs to make this segment happy. However it won't undercut their ability to sell AAC to the "average Joe." I don't think it's reasonable to assume it would.
--Cless
EDIT: Phrasing, formatting.
Re: Poor Microsoft
I am not sure and maybe I am assuming something here but I thought that the whole idea of the deal was that HP PCs and Laptops were going to ship with iTunes /iTMS installed in place of Windows Media Player, that being that they get iTunes and Quick Time other wise why all the fuss from Microsoft about iTunes not taking the .wma format
If the PCs came with both media players then the deal wiould be ineffective
Originally posted by nagromme
Uncle Fester says HP-Apple = LESS choice??
All these HP PC's will surely come with Windows Media Player etc. as part of Windows, just as always. They'll ALSO now have iTunes. And HP buyers, like everyone else, will be free to choose ANY music players, and online store(s) that they wish. They need not select an HP iPod, and need not use iTunes at all.
So... compared to when HP pre-installed WMP alone without adding iTunes... this new plan represents a LOSS of choice?
Poor Microsoft is less and less able to dupe people with that kind of logic these days
And those who think Apple should add WMA in order to sell more iPods should remember:
1. One of the best things about Apple's offerings is that all the pieces work together as an unparalleled system.
2. iPod is already the best selling player, without WMA.
3. Short term gains from the (few) people who have already bought WMAs would be offset by long term losses when Microsoft-controlled music is promoted. (Damage the iTunes Store and in the long run Apple damages iPod sales too.)
4. WMA owners can rip from CD-R to AAC if they need to--but most people are buying music from Apple anyway.
5. Microsoft is whining because they KNOW Apple has made good choices.
I am not sure and maybe I am assuming something here but I thought that the whole idea of the deal was that HP PCs and Laptops were going to ship with iTunes /iTMS installed in place of Windows Media Player, that being that they get iTunes and Quick Time other wise why all the fuss from Microsoft about iTunes not taking the .wma format
If the PCs came with both media players then the deal wiould be ineffective
Have you submitted feedback? If so, excellent. Get all your friends who want OGG format to do the same. If not, stop complaining on a forum and help DO something about it. And you should STILL get all your friends who want OGG format supported natively to send feedback as well. If there's demand, I can't see Apple denying the ability. Especially since OGG is free.
EDIT: I'm assuming, of course, that you mean the ability to ENCODE to OGG and/or store and play OGG on the iPod, since there's already a free QuickTime component to play the format which works in iTunes (obviously). I can see OGG being a longer shot, since as a lossy compression scheme similar in nature to AAC, an endorsement by Apple might be construed as an incomplete backing of AAC. Have there been any independent tests comparing AAC and OGG at the same bitrates?
--Cless
The Only Possible Deal on WMA I can imagen
that would be a half year dominance of the monopoly ACC on iTMS.
after that i can imagen that apple and ms sign a deal that MS builds in ACC and Quicktime support with the propertary DRM that apple build in into their Windows Media product series and Apple builds in WMA and WMV support into iTMS and Quicktime (or both leave out the video stuff optionally)
this way wma and acc would coexist and HP would not need to fight with MS all the time.
but for now i dont see a reason iTMS, apple or hp should support WMA.
the ppl can listen to the songs, can buy and download them on windows using a stable player.
there is just NO need for WMA and there is in addition no use for apple.
only hp might be just a bit happier cause they would not be in the situation BETWEEN apple and MS.
but well - hp just chose - in one market segment - who is the better one.
lets hope it stays that way
even though i fear any apple monopoly - because i take SJ sireous when he flirts with BG... somehow they are totally different and somehow they are very similar - those two boys.
apple is a capitalistic company that wants profit and nothing else...
so fear their monopolies - they got a much better STARTING position than MS ever had because they sell hardware AND software bundled.
if they get 20 or 30% i hope they are forced to allow LICENSES for clones (not that just anyone can build and sell apple, but some other retailers)
but for now - apple is small - AND GREAT.
l8er
ionas
that would be a half year dominance of the monopoly ACC on iTMS.
after that i can imagen that apple and ms sign a deal that MS builds in ACC and Quicktime support with the propertary DRM that apple build in into their Windows Media product series and Apple builds in WMA and WMV support into iTMS and Quicktime (or both leave out the video stuff optionally)
this way wma and acc would coexist and HP would not need to fight with MS all the time.
but for now i dont see a reason iTMS, apple or hp should support WMA.
the ppl can listen to the songs, can buy and download them on windows using a stable player.
there is just NO need for WMA and there is in addition no use for apple.
only hp might be just a bit happier cause they would not be in the situation BETWEEN apple and MS.
but well - hp just chose - in one market segment - who is the better one.
lets hope it stays that way
even though i fear any apple monopoly - because i take SJ sireous when he flirts with BG... somehow they are totally different and somehow they are very similar - those two boys.
apple is a capitalistic company that wants profit and nothing else...
so fear their monopolies - they got a much better STARTING position than MS ever had because they sell hardware AND software bundled.
if they get 20 or 30% i hope they are forced to allow LICENSES for clones (not that just anyone can build and sell apple, but some other retailers)
but for now - apple is small - AND GREAT.
l8er
ionas
ugh. . . all this audio codec format blah blah blah arguing is giving me a headache. A bunch of techies like us could weigh pros and cons of the AAC vs. WMA battle 'till our head explode. But face it, the average Joe PC user drone doesn't care what format their player uses. They just want it easy to use and sound good (enough). Hmm, that sounds strangely like the iPod/iTMS mantra, could it by why iTMS is winning? AAC is dominating the market right now, what's the point in changing? Average Joe is gonna be happy with his iPod, and tell his buddy Bob that it's awesome, so Bob will buy one too. If, at some point in the future, the monopolistic monster that is Microsoft out muscles AAC, then I'm sure the iPod can adapt in order to save it's popularity. The HP deal gives AAC another kick in the rump towards being the defacto download standard. Formats are formats are formats, throw in a driver and it plays. (don't get all technical on me and say, while pushing up your glasses by the middle, that its more complicated than adding a driver. I know that, let Apple handle the details.) Maybe Michael Dell should think about adding AAC support to the Dell DJ. If he does, then let him, Jobs can licence out the iTMS to him and actually make some money off it.
oh, and iTune converting WMA to AAC would be tough with DRM. So that's not really an option either.
Ok, enough ranting. . . except what I want to know is when will someone (ahem, Apple) put a 4GB microdrive into a digi-camera. (mmmm, auto-sync with iPhoto.) If the iPod mini kills flash MP3 players . . then let flash cameras die with them. Flash is dead.
oh, and iTune converting WMA to AAC would be tough with DRM. So that's not really an option either.
Ok, enough ranting. . . except what I want to know is when will someone (ahem, Apple) put a 4GB microdrive into a digi-camera. (mmmm, auto-sync with iPhoto.) If the iPod mini kills flash MP3 players . . then let flash cameras die with them. Flash is dead.
...What?
Don't post if you:
1) Don't know what the heck you're talking about, and/or...
2) Refuse to make sense.
Please clarify your post so we can respond intelligently. For now, all I can come up with is "What on earth are you talking about here?" The only thing that I can glean here is that you don't know what OGG is. To answer that question, it's a lossy audio compression codec (full name is Ogg Vorbis) that is free, open-source and offers higher quality than MP3 at the same bitrates.
--Cless
Man, what IS the big deal on this issue. WMA sucks up a joint, it's M$ crappola with their typical "we're the standard" strong arm rhetoric that people eat up like flies to s*** (which is is, and people who choose their stuff mere flies), they're not going to use it on iPod, horray, enough, move on, next!
Originally posted by x86isslow
as a user stuck using windows, i worry when i hear that both wmp and itunes are bundled oem.
on my computer, i have to watch a war between quicktime, wmp and real for the rights to play files, and since each program wants to play them, my computer suffers from chronic system hangups.
I remember those days.
SO glad I switched! Free yourself, brother! Hangups shall plague you no more! (Well, at least in your computer. I can't comment on your personal life.)--DT
Re: Re: Missing the Point?
Gotcha. I realize some PC manus make good dough. My bigger point was that they make this money entirely at Microsoft's discretion. Regardless of how much money Dell makes, the fact remains that they make it by being completely submissive to Microsoft (and Intel to a lesser degree).
Really, in practical terms, Dell and other pc Manus are little more (very little more) than the hardware arms of Microsoft.
I think, back to the WMA vs. AAC point, that it would be incredibly healthy for a somewhat larger part of the computer industry to exist outside of Microsoft's utter dominance.
This is also a reason that the HP/Apple deal is so significant. It represents a major manu. refusing to tow Redmond's line for once. And, from early comments, MS doesn't much like it. Look for Microsoft to try to punish HP in some way for this.
Gotcha. I realize some PC manus make good dough. My bigger point was that they make this money entirely at Microsoft's discretion. Regardless of how much money Dell makes, the fact remains that they make it by being completely submissive to Microsoft (and Intel to a lesser degree).
Really, in practical terms, Dell and other pc Manus are little more (very little more) than the hardware arms of Microsoft.
I think, back to the WMA vs. AAC point, that it would be incredibly healthy for a somewhat larger part of the computer industry to exist outside of Microsoft's utter dominance.
This is also a reason that the HP/Apple deal is so significant. It represents a major manu. refusing to tow Redmond's line for once. And, from early comments, MS doesn't much like it. Look for Microsoft to try to punish HP in some way for this.
Justg a curiosity
Almost everybody in the discussions about WMA vs AAC (and some other formats) seems to assume that one format will eventually win the "war".
I am not so sure. Microsoft (of all) put in the point of people having choices. I don't think that is what MS wants people to have -but sounds nice noe However - the one thing to ignite the online music revolution was the freedom of the mp3 format - anyone could use it, free to copy and share etc. No format that uses DRM will ever take hold of the market (unless there is an effective crack to it). Also, as seen here, people are already starting to get their preferences - and they reach from more flexibility to ease of use to higher quality - in addition the mere emotional aspect.
I think we will see a lot of formats prevailing, and more coming, and that the players we use competes in being the better to use.
Well that is what I hope anyway.
So iTunes getting support for more formats (be it OGG or WMA or whatever) I think only would put this ahead of the pack - even more...
Almost everybody in the discussions about WMA vs AAC (and some other formats) seems to assume that one format will eventually win the "war".
I am not so sure. Microsoft (of all) put in the point of people having choices. I don't think that is what MS wants people to have -but sounds nice noe
However - the one thing to ignite the online music revolution was the freedom of the mp3 format - anyone could use it, free to copy and share etc. No format that uses DRM will ever take hold of the market (unless there is an effective crack to it). Also, as seen here, people are already starting to get their preferences - and they reach from more flexibility to ease of use to higher quality - in addition the mere emotional aspect.I think we will see a lot of formats prevailing, and more coming, and that the players we use competes in being the better to use.
Well that is what I hope anyway.
So iTunes getting support for more formats (be it OGG or WMA or whatever) I think only would put this ahead of the pack - even more...
Re: No iPods for any other PC mfg.??
It was stated as a multiyear exclusive deal between Apple & HP.
Unlike somebody else here I don't want to see iPods all over the place anyway... destroys the brand and part of the pleasure of owning one.
It was stated as a multiyear exclusive deal between Apple & HP.
Unlike somebody else here I don't want to see iPods all over the place anyway... destroys the brand and part of the pleasure of owning one.
Interesting...
I had never heard of this guy, so I looked up his name on Google. Went to his website, and found this:
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/ces04.asp
Probably a bunch of nonsense, but interesting to see it anyway.
Daringfireball.net has an interesting take on the HP-Apple deal.
The H-Bomb
edit: urg sry Kettle, i didn't notice that you posted the exact same thing i'll leave it here anyways
The H-Bomb
edit: urg sry Kettle, i didn't notice that you posted the exact same thing
i'll leave it here anywaysMattG, fudge Thurott is a complete ****, don't believe a word he says. He's just pro Microsoft (how sad can you get) and writes stuff which is blatently untrue. I'm not exagerating.
P.S. Don't even bother going to his sites so that he gets one more to his 'vistitors count'.
P.S. Don't even bother going to his sites so that he gets one more to his 'vistitors count'.