@trac wrote:
Last question:
If most/all manufacturers supported AAC(and they will) as they do MP3, what format would be the de facto standard?
From the Hydrogenaudio page:
“In terms of quality, the AAC format is on par with (Ogg) Vorbis, LAME MP3, WMA Pro and other modern codecs.”
Conversionbox wrote:
Trac and Peregrine, Apparently Royalties are an issue. It might not seem like it, but if SansaFix says it is then it must be. He would know. I do notice that the Connect played (I dont know if it still does) ACC files, but thats been a while ago, before this kind of stuff really mattered.
Thanks, I’ll take your word for. There must be more to the royalties than what the website is showing.
@marvin_martian wrote:
When I said people were mis- or un-informed when they bought stuff from iTunes in that format, I was referring to the fact that people obviously didn’t know that the format did not have universal hardware support, like MP3…hence my “caveat emptor” remark.
That’s part of the problem with the digital music business these days. People shouldn’t have to think about whether their music should work on any player, any more than they should have to think about whether any gasoline works with their car.
Misinformed or not, iTunes is not just the largest digital music store, it is the largest music store of any sort. Not supporting that is not only ignoring the largest music market, but also the one bit of the (legal) music market that is actually growing.
Message Edited by bdb on 06-09-2009 04:17 PM
IMO I don’t think iTunes market share will last for more then a few more years. Amazon has made a small dent in it (up to 18% currently) and as time goes by I believe other companies will, as well.
Instead of pressuring Sansa, MS, Creative and everyone else to adopt AAC maybe the people shoulod pressure Apple to embrace MP3 or FLC. (Of course I know that won’t happen. Just saying…)
From a manufacturing standpoint, a one-dollar (assuming the base rate listed, smallest quantity of devices) cost increase at this level, must translate into a much higher increase at the retail (end user) level. There are hidden costs of many sorts in implementing support.
Licensing can be a royal pain indeed.
Having the other codecs available gives us plenty of alternatives. Though it may, at first glance, make sense to support the AAC codec, I’m sure that plenty of spreadsheets were consulted.
In my opinion, OGG is the secret weapon. Providing both OGG and FLAC was a very wise choice.
Bob :smileyvery-happy:
@trac wrote:
@conversionbox wrote:
Trac and Peregrine, Apparently Royalties are an issue. It might not seem like it, but if SansaFix says it is then it must be. He would know. I do notice that the Connect played (I dont know if it still does) ACC files, but thats been a while ago, before this kind of stuff really mattered.
Thanks, I’ll take your word for. There must be more to the royalties than what the website is showing.
Don’t forget that the quoted $1 per unit will actually add between $3 and $5 at retail, so that’s a fairly significant amount when margins are likely to be very thin and people are very price conscious (especially now).
AAC only has a strong draw to people that buy from iTunes. I don’t on principal, in exactly the same way that I won’t buy any piece of Apple hardware because their modus operandi is to try to lock people in after they’ve been seduced by the admittedly nicely designed physical Apple stuff. I don’t like proprietary so I don’t play their game.
If as a non-iTunes user Ogg and FLAC isn’t enough for you then I don’t know what would be.
Agreed Brian.
I used to work at a mega law firm. One of the wealthy attorneys I worked with broke his iPod. I was like “You should seriously look at the Trekstor Vibez. It has so many more features then your iPod.”
He says “Yea, but I’ve spent $500 on iTunes. I’m kind of trapped now…”
Yea…
GG Apple…
Message Edited by Peregrine on 06-10-2009 09:39 AM
@peregrine wrote:
Agreed Brian.
I used to work at a mega law firm. One of the wealthy attorneys I worked with broke his iPod. I was like “You should seriously look at the Trekstor Vibez. It has so many more features then your iPod.”
He says “Yea, but I’ve spent $500 on iTunes. I’m kind of trapped now…”
Yea…
GG Apple…
Message Edited by Peregrine on 06-10-2009 09:39 AM
Yup, no iPods or Zunes in my future.
Sometimes, you just have to love Google. If you enter “trapped in iTunes”, check the second listing, “Trapped”.
Just watch what happens when you click on the link. The initial graphic made me spill my coffee.
Actually, if you are feeling like a coffee, you can pop in to the local Starbuck’s and Apple will follow you there. Get a wee “free download card” with today’s “pick”. Uh, can we have your credit card first? Just open a “trial account”…
Any old school Star Trek fans? Landru told me, "you are not of the body! You will be absorbed!!"
Bob :smileyvery-happy:
@neutron_bob wrote:
Sometimes, you just have to love Google. If you enter “trapped in iTunes”, check the second listing, “Trapped”.
Just watch what happens when you click on the link. The initial graphic made me spill my coffee.
Actually, if you are feeling like a coffee, you can pop in to the local Starbuck’s and Apple will follow you there. Get a wee “free download card” with today’s “pick”. Uh, can we have your credit card first? Just open a “trial account”…
Any old school Star Trek fans? Landru told me, "you are not of the body! You will be absorbed!!"
Bob :smileyvery-happy:
I can’t remember the Landru episode ATM…is it anything like being assimilated by the Borg in the newer (not as good) itineration of Trek?
Am I missing something??
It just takes you to iTunes, Bob?
@peregrine wrote:
Am I missing something??
It just takes you to iTunes, Bob?
That’s what I saw, Peregrine. My reaction was 
@peregrine wrote:
He says “Yea, but I’ve spent $500 on iTunes. I’m kind of trapped now…”
That used to be the case up until April 1st, since the DRMed music really was proprietary. Now iTunes uses a standard non-DRM codec, so it’ll work on a lot of devices. I can play music from iTunes on my phone, car stereo, home DVD player, PC, and probably a few other things…but not my Fuze.
I didn’t buy much from iTunes with DRM (though I have a lot of the free downloads). To be honest, though, I still don’t buy from them because of the price.
I was glad to finally hear from sansafix, just so I know it was a conscious decision on their part. Obviously they’re on this forum and so they see all the people who buy Fuzes at Christmas then return them because it won’t play iTunes music, and they don’t feel that business is worth the extra dollar per unit. Sounds like bean counters at work. Given that iTunes was mostly DRMed last Christmas, that seems like a reasonable decision. Maybe as DRM-free AAC becomes more common, things will change. Certainly support for AAC has really grown over the past few years.
Message Edited by bdb on 06-10-2009 09:30 AM
My point? Did you notice the Google search? Listed under TRAPPED is the actual iTunes link. Is that a bizarre admission? A Freudian slip? Take a look at the Google page listing.
Funny stuff.
Oh, and the Landru episode (late '60s iteration of Star Trek) had ominous robed goons with a big stick, that would “absorb” their victims. Scary stuff when you’re five, eh?
Bob :dizzy_face:
Message Edited by neutron_bob on 06-10-2009 06:02 PM
I think if SanDisk charged for an optional specific firmware update that would enable the support, both parties could be happy. Sandisk could make it available at or slightly above their cost and that would be exceedingly fair. I understand that in the software development world this can be impossible because it’s another branch that requires testing and maintenance so I’d say the chance of this happening is a long shot.
@peregrine wrote:
Instead of pressuring Sansa, MS, Creative and everyone else to adopt AAC maybe the people shoulod pressure Apple to embrace MP3 or FLC. (Of course I know that won’t happen. Just saying…)
AAC is the successor codec to MP3 - designed by more or less the same people. It is a modern codec, like WMA, intended to improve sound quality and/or increase the compression ratio. Sooner or later one would hope that mp3 could be laid to rest - its had its day, and frankly to me sounds substandard, even at 320kbps.
Obviously Sansa thought they ought to support a modern advanced codec, hence their support of WMA. It just rather unfortunate they chose to support the codec that has the least market support. Though it may change in the future, at present there are more AAC files out there than WMA. The obvious sensible decision would be to support both if possible.
I am rather forming the opinion that there might be pressure from Microsoft not too support their arch rivals codec. Perhaps Sansa get a good licensing deal from Microsoft if they drop support for AAC. I don’t know if this is true, of course, but it sounds plausible. Microsoft has behaved this way in the past on many occasions.
@marvin_martian wrote:
Is it really SanDisk’s fault that some people were misinformed or uninformed enough to buy music from iTunes in that format? The phrase “caveat emptor” comes to mind:wink:
I was certainly aware of the limited support for AAC when I made my iTunes purchases, but I really had no choice. Firstly, I hate the sound quality of mp3 files - I certainly would not pay money for them. Secondly, I hate DRM, and iTunes is now DRM free, whearas the WMA ones in my neck of the woods still had DRM on them. I actually prefer the sound of WMA to AAC - I convert my CD collection to this codec for the sound quality. But the stuff I got from iTunes I could not buy as a CD, and there was no where else to go.
@tempusfuzit wrote:
I am rather forming the opinion that there might be pressure from Microsoft not too support their arch rivals codec. Perhaps Sansa get a good licensing deal from Microsoft if they drop support for AAC. I don’t know if this is true, of course, but it sounds plausible. Microsoft has behaved this way in the past on many occasions.
Actually, the Zune players do support AAC. Sansa would have to pay a licensing fee to support AAC, which a Sansa employee here said they would not do.
@tempusfuzit wrote:
@marvin_martian wrote:
Is it really SanDisk’s fault that some people were misinformed or uninformed enough to buy music from iTunes in that format? The phrase “caveat emptor” comes to mind:wink:
I was certainly aware of the limited support for AAC when I made my iTunes purchases, but I really had no choice. Firstly, I hate the sound quality of mp3 files - I certainly would not pay money for them. Secondly, I hate DRM, and iTunes is now DRM free, whearas the WMA ones in my neck of the woods still had DRM on them. I actually prefer the sound of WMA to AAC - I convert my CD collection to this codec for the sound quality. But the stuff I got from iTunes I could not buy as a CD, and there was no where else to go.
The newest version of the LAME “mp3” codec is transparent (indistinguishable from lossless) at its highest quality setting for the vast majority of people. The older mp3 encoders, as you stated, did not sound so hot. I will agree with you that the newer WMA VBR on Windows Media Player 11 can produce good quality sound. And yeah, I understand there is some music you can’t find anywhere else but iTunes…I’d like that to change, but there’s nothing I can do about it…I’m just one poor music fan. 
@tempusfuzit wrote:
@peregrine wrote:
Instead of pressuring Sansa, MS, Creative and everyone else to adopt AAC maybe the people shoulod pressure Apple to embrace MP3 or FLC. (Of course I know that won’t happen. Just saying…)
AAC is the successor codec to MP3 - designed by more or less the same people. It is a modern codec, like WMA, intended to improve sound quality and/or increase the compression ratio. Sooner or later one would hope that mp3 could be laid to rest - its had its day, and frankly to me sounds substandard, even at 320kbps.
Obviously Sansa thought they ought to support a modern advanced codec, hence their support of WMA. It just rather unfortunate they chose to support the codec that has the least market support. Though it may change in the future, at present there are more AAC files out there than WMA. The obvious sensible decision would be to support both if possible.
I am rather forming the opinion that there might be pressure from Microsoft not too support their arch rivals codec. Perhaps Sansa get a good licensing deal from Microsoft if they drop support for AAC. I don’t know if this is true, of course, but it sounds plausible. Microsoft has behaved this way in the past on many occasions.
Well, its one of many would be successor formats to MP3. The only thing special about AAC from this stand point, is that many of the same people behind MP3 also get paid when you license AAC. Since their MP3 patents are expiring as the format becomes free, they won’t get paid much longer unless you switch to AAC. Of course, if you don’t switch, soon people won’t have to pay anything at all
Regarding WMA, they presumably chose it so they could support music stores. MS sells that with their codec license, the MPEG-LA does not, so unless you’re got your own music store, AAC is quite a bit worse of a deal.
| Legal | Terms of Use | Privacy Statement | Forum Terms of Service |
|
| © Western Digital Corporation or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Western Digital Technologies, Inc. is the seller of record and licensee in the Americas of SanDisk® products. |
