BetaONE will rise again!


View Poll Results:
I use WMA9 and that's the best I've ever used 4 36.36%
I use WMA8 and will move to WMA9 after WMP9 is finalized 1 9.09%
I use mp3PRO and will not move to any WMA format 2 18.18%
I use MP3 and stick with it 4 36.36%
Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  #11  
Old 19th Oct 02, 02:44 AM
~*McoreD*~'s Avatar
~*McoreD*~ ~*McoreD*~ is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,902
~*McoreD*~ is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally posted by Zone-MR@Oct 19 2002, 05:47 AM
I agree that WMP may be superior technically but I dont use it for one simple reason - compatibility...

I have a much wider range of players, platfroms and hardware that can play MP3. Not to mention if I download files of kazaa all audio files are MP3. I am not short of disk space, and compatibillity is more important to me than compression.

If compression was very important to me, I still wouldnt use WMA but OGG. OGG is less-known but provides better compression than WMA. Not to mention the matter of morals, that I prefer open-source equivelants especially if they are better...
oh oh the compatibility,
yea I agree with that. at the time when i was first moved to WMA from MP3, i couldn't find a way (as there was no way ) to use those WMA to create Audio CDs. also i couldn't play them in Jet Audio Extension with the graphics equalizer working. I contacted JAE for that, and asked if they will have that feature in the future updates. but i was disappointed cos they didnt give a shit about that. Pffft JAE now. :P

ATM i am not playing any of my songs in portable players cos i dont have one mostly i play them in this PC, or i wanna go outside, i play them in my laptop. if i am gonna buy a portable player, i will be buying one which supports both WMA and MP3, something like Nomad Jukebox or something.

Ooops, something is wrong there with OGG is better than WMA in compression? well, i have tried OGG at 32kbps and WMA9 at 32kbps. cos i needed see which one has more compression. clearly WMA9 had more compression. same with Real Audio 8 with ATRAC3. Remember m8, you have to compare with WMA9 not with WMAv2. have you heard of that shitty Windows Media Audio v2? it is hell crap and gives only CD quality at 128kbps. still the CD Quality to me is like 256kbps. btw no one uses WMAv2 now, cos it is now already gone.



Last edited by McoreD at Oct 19 2002, 09:46 AM
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DVR-MS To WMV9 with WMA9 Professional 5.1 Audio ~*McoreD*~ FAQ & Tutorials 2 27th Oct 04 01:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:41 AM.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin for phpBBStyles.com.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.