Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why doesn't the iPod just support WMA?

W

wowoah

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 16, 2003
187
0
Berkeley, CA
Just a thought for you all to chew on. First, let it be known that I'm a proud Mac owner and 2G iPod owner who absolutely believes in the virtues of AAC and the wretchedness of WMA and all its accompanying DRM nightmares and such.

That being said, if the purpose of ITMS is not to sell music but rather to sell iPods, wouldn't be advantageous for Apple to start offering WMA support? I mean, such a move might hurt ITMS, but with the profitability of the iPod so much higher than ITMS, would it really matter that much? In fact, I've read some analysts that speculate Apple might be ::losing money:: on ITMS, although the service has sparked over 100% increase in iPod sales.

What does everyone think? I for one believe that if Apple gives users absolute freedom in where they get their music from, they'll respond overwhelmingly in support of the iPod.

Once again, just food for thought.
 
Given that there are perfectly adequate AAC players for windows, I doubt that Apple will add WMA support, iTunes may be able to convert between the codecs, but I would imagine Apple would want the sonic qualities of AAC.

There's probably no reason NOT to put WMA in an iPod, but why pay the fee's for the license?
 
I dont think iPod needs to play WMA, but iTunes should, and should convert WMA on the fly to (AAC/MP3/other) for use on iPod.
 
WMA is proprietary, closed, DRM infested crap, and I'm happy ipod/itunes don't support it.

On the other hand, where is the OGG support? I find the lack of OGG far more disconcerting.
 
no itunes doesnt convert on the fly but it should, just like other media jukeboxes, burn applications, etc.

WMA is not proprietary, closed, or DRM infested crap (by itself). The entire Windows Media 9 was submitted as an open standard (not open source, it's not the same). MS learned a lesson with WM7 and DivX, when the hackers cracked WM7 and rerelased it as DivX they lost thier chance to take credit for what we all use almost daily. WM9 is backwards compatible with previous WM standards making the whole thing free to use for everyone, but no one adopted it except the inventors.

The DRM is handled and encoded on the Windows side, just like Apple uses FairPlay for DRM in AAC. Get off your high horse. Apple is giving us no more or less in terms of codecs than anyone else.
 
Originally posted by slowtreme
I dont think iPod needs to play WMA, but iTunes should, and should convert WMA on the fly to (AAC/MP3/other) for use on iPod.
Click to expand...
"converting on the fly" would take a really long time for users with large wma libraries.

also, converting from one compression format to another can cause bad reductions in quality, even when going from a lower quality to a higher, it can decrease the overall quality of the recording. apple doesn't need to have that potential complaint against the iPod.

and they shouldn't makwe WMA work on iTunes but not the iPod, because that's inherently confusing and frustrating to users to have songs that play in iTunes but not on the iPod.
 
Originally posted by shadowfax
"converting on the fly" would take a really long time for users with large wma libraries.
Click to expand...
Well there you go! In one step you have made windows users happy, and provided a simple penalty for users not using MP3 or AAC. Nevermind the issues with converting from one format to the other. While it's valid, iTunes is trying to get me to re-encode all my MP3 to AAC, what's the difference?

User syncs iPod -->
Message box popup: Some of the files you have requested to load to your iPod are not an iPod format. These will take longer to load while iTunes converts them. In the future please use AAC as your music format. Do you wish to continue [OK] [No thanks]
 
how many times does this have to come up?? adding WMA support to the iPod would kill the iTunes music store. it would have almost no market share quickly and thus lose it's contracts with the bigger labels. it's plain, old, simple business sense.

the iPod and the iTMS support each other through a closed system. if you opened the system, one of the two would fail, and i'll bet it's not the iPod (since it existed before the closed system)

:rolleyes: i know this is too much to comprehend, and someone will just say "that's dumb, they should add it because it would be KEWL!". these people have no comprehension of consumer marketing and sales. which is why Apple doesn't add support, it's a bad idea. get it?

of course not.

pnw
 
>wowoah

Maybe Jobs will support WMA DRM when he begins shipping Macs with multi-button/scroll wheeled rodents.

Or in short, WMAs DRM scheme doesn't fit in with Steve's vision of user friendliness for the iPod and the iTMS.

But do you really want the freedom of choice you're asking for?

Especially since that choice would probably lock you into MS's more restrictive DRM system.

Because once you make the choice to support WMA and MS's DRM, Fairplay dies.
 
Ok just to though a spanner right in the Box why cant the iPod just be a full on multi media player play every god dam file format on the planet..

Answer you though in all the crap and you get crap put in what is only needed and what keeps everyone happy then thats the way to go ... what everyone is missing here is iTunes for Mac / Windows both play aac files both use the iPod that uses aac and mp3 .... Whats the frigging problem people are you more intreted in wma because you want to use a prodcut that has DRM SLAPPED ALL OVER IT..

Besides whats the point in having aac if your going to use wma ... Think ive just lost the plot over this the iPod dose what it dose it plays music dose it matter what format it plays i ask ya get a life ...


Oh and I am not been evil here i think that at this present time to much is been asked of a product that dose the job perfectly rember it was designed as an mp3 player not a i want everything player
 
Originally posted by paulwhannel
how many times does this have to come up?? adding WMA support to the iPod would kill the iTunes music store. it would have almost no market share quickly and thus lose it's contracts with the bigger labels. it's plain, old, simple business sense.

the iPod and the iTMS support each other through a closed system. if you opened the system, one of the two would fail, and i'll bet it's not the iPod (since it existed before the closed system)

:rolleyes: i know this is too much to comprehend, and someone will just say "that's dumb, they should add it because it would be KEWL!". these people have no comprehension of consumer marketing and sales. which is why Apple doesn't add support, it's a bad idea. get it?

of course not.

pnw
Click to expand...
that is pretty much what I was saying in the "microsoft thinks itms is not open enough whatever etc." thread, and unfortunately most of the replys that followed were still stuck on "it would be KEWL" deal.
I'll say it again, iTunes for Win is not inteded to cater to the needs of windows users, it is intended to catch the attention of said windows users and incite them into switching to a mac.
And besides that I really can not understand why anyone would choose windows media in the first place.
 
Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
iTunes should support WMA, Ogg Vorbis, and every other audio codec known to man. There should also be an iTunes Music Store for porn, and I really want a Mercedes-Benz. Anything else?
Click to expand...

Yep, but not only iTunes. The itms should give you a choice between aac or wma files. That way you could use any player you wanted. Yeah...and maybe a discount to those not using an ipod to drum up more music sales...yep... that would make perfect business sense.
 
Originally posted by medea

And besides that I really can not understand why anyone would choose windows media in the first place.
Click to expand...

there is a difference? :D :D
really - most windows users do not care what they use as long as it works. Now i can assure you iT will not work in longhorn - MS will make sure of that. (But Apple's code is so tight and future proof that it is going to take them three years to figure it out.)
 
Originally posted by benixau
there is a difference? :D :D
really - most windows users do not care what they use as long as it works. Now i can assure you iT will not work in longhorn - MS will make sure of that. (But Apple's code is so tight and future proof that it is going to take them three years to figure it out.)
Click to expand...

Why would Microsoft sabotage iTunes?

Exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back