@doccolinni wrote:
Sure, the guys from Tunghai University didn’t know what the heck they’re doing.
Correct.
doccolinni wrote:
What do you mean they couldn’t get their paper published? :-| I don’t understand.
The version you linked had no journal information and was not hosted by a journal, so I assumed it was unpublished. Looking at your link, thats a conference proceeding (which is an electronically generated document that is not viewed by a human being before going onto the website), not a publication (which is a document that is edited and reviewed by a human being for content before being accepted). So i believe I am correct. They were not able to get these results published.
Presumably they were not published because either the editors or the authors realized they were ■■■■.
doccolinni wrote:
Also, MP2 and MP3 only showing a small difference? Are you nuts? The increase in power consumption between MP2 and MP3 is almost 20%, I wouldn’t call that small. Also there was no MP1 in their tests, MP2-1, MP2-2 and MP2-3 are all MP2 files with different headers.
Compared to the difference they should have got, yes, it is small. And really, comparing different MP2 headers is even weirder then what I thought they were doing. Why would the header have any impact at all? Does the author realize how silly that comparison is? If he doesn’t realize what the header does, then what exactly does he know about MP2? Anything at all?
When you read a scientific paper, you’re trusting the writer to know what hes talking about, unless like me you’re willing to go out and repeat his experiments. If you read something thats completely dumb and suggests the author doesn’t know what hes talking about, should you really trust him? I wouldn’t.
doccolinni wrote:
If you don’t understand what and how they were doing it doesn’t automatically mean that they didn’t understand what they were doing, they’ve explained it in detail in section 3.1 Experiment Environment and 3.2 Experiment Setup.
No the fact that they don’t realize you need to say how they decoded the files is why I know they don’t know what they’re doing. The experimental information they give is completely useless. The useful information is withheld. Either the author is intentionally being malicious, or the author is incompetent. I assume he is incompetent rather then malicious.
doccolinni wrote:
Also relevant are these test results, although they are for Sansa Clip.
Those tests show a 72% difference. Your link shows an 18% difference. How can you disagree with me that your link cannot be applied to the Fuze when its off by several fold! You probably couldn’t have guessed a number and been closer then those “measurements”.
doccolinni wrote:
But whatever player you used, such a huge difference between MP3 and OGG cannot be just a random fluke of the player. As you say MP2 definitely is less power consuming than MP3 (and based on that paper by at least 20%), so imagine the difference between MP2 and OGG if the difference between MP3 and OGG is so huge.
Why should I imagine it? I already measured it and told you what it is. You have the information you want. Stop speculating and use it.
And the differences are not a fluke. The one in the paper is due to the paper being dumb and wrong. The one with the Sandisk firmware is due to a bug in Tremor that will hopefully be corrected in future firmware revisions. The correct results I gave you are due to my results being correct 
So three widely different numbers, three completely different reasons for them.
