The only reason Apple is using AAC is because it is an obscure format which tends to lock users into a Mac/iPod solution.
No, the only reason Apple is using AAC is because it's an open, documented, non vendor-locked format that cannot be simply hijacked and manipulated by, say, Microsoft.
AAC is cross platform; in fact, AAC is the logical successor to MP3, so everything you love or hate about MP3, ideologically, should apply to AAC. To think otherwise seems silly and ignorant to me.
I never said 128kbps from master was higher quality than 128kbps from CD, I only said it was arguable.
And there are two variables here, not one, as your analogy suggests.
Not only are we measuring the quality of 128kbps VBR encoded from master by Apple's exclusive software... we are comparing against a population that listens to and enjoys music on FM radio!
So the whole idea of 'ear for music' is largely elitist and artifical. Music is more than just fidelity, just like software quality is more than zero defects.
Music is rhythm, melody, lyrics, atmosphere, and energy, as well, and fidelity only matters in how effective those aspects are conveyed to the listener.
You've actually listenened to AAC files and think they're shitty:)
Most of the population (at least 90% I bet) haven't had access to a Mac, the iTunes Music Store, or Apple encoded AACs, and thus the complaints of most folk are... probably purely speculative.
Myself, I find AAC by iTunes is >> MP3 by iTunes, and AAC by Apple is ~> than AAC by iTunes and MP3 by iTunes.
It is worthy to note that I'm not using LAME, so my basis for quality is already lower than yours.
Just to keep you intellectually honest...
on
AAC Put To The Test
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It doesn't sound like you use a Mac or the iTunes Music Store, so why do you say the AACs from Apple are shitty?
There are at least three distinct things to keep in mind: MP3s encoded from your music using LAME at 220kbps VBR is one quality AACs encoded with Quicktime 6.3 is one quality AACs encoded from masters, ala iTunes Music Store, are another quality
You, in one sentence, mix all three quality levels as if they are currently comparable.
The music from the iTunes music store is encoded from a higher quality source, and can arguably be of higher quality than even your 220kbps mp3s. It's hard to make any educated guess because I don't know anyone who's done a comparison between AAC files ripped from masters vs MP3s ripped from CD.
The music you get from iTunes itself is based on Quicktime 6.3, and that *is* being compared and characterized in this test; this will probably illustrate the level of quality iTunes for Windows will have, and is more directly comparable to your 220kbps mp3s, but only *after* the test is performed.
it's fine to believe that your mp3s are better, but there is no proof yet.
That was a flippant answer to his seeming flippant post.
I like Ogg fine. It is my codec of choice, except of course that no one bothers to support it for my OS of choice, OS X.
There's no good Ogg encoders that can interface with iTunes and support Unicode (yet, of course) There's no Ogg codec for Quicktime on OS X 10.2.6 (yet, of course)
I much prefer Ogg, ideologically, but it's not something I can actually *live* with, because the support isn't there.
I have 100% support for MP3 and AAC.
Yes, I believe in fighting for causes I believe in. Right now Ogg is not one of those causes; maybe later. Right now I'm more concerned with my friends, my mortgage, and my state of unemployment, sorry.
Re:Isn't AAC used for its DRM features?
on
AAC Put To The Test
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Well, if you don't care about the quality, why the heck does it matter if Ogg has good or bad quality?
All it needs to be is open and unencumbered, right?
Well, the AAC produced by Apple Quicktime isn't DRM burdened, even if it does have some patent stuff attached.
I've been suggesting this for years, and have done it several times myself.
Export from Outlook/Outlook Express into Eudora, and from Eudora into Mail.
I used Eudora for a looong time exactly because it was cross compatible across platforms and versions. My mailboxes from 1996 are still readable in Eudora in 2003:)
But Mail is just too darned convenient, so I switched last year; same with Mozilla/Safari.
So a computer that sounds like a jet engine is okay Or that vibrates like a jackhammer Or a screen that flickers like mad Or where the power supply buzzes Or where the monitor is 5" too tall, 10" too close Where the machine is like a space heater, and it's already 80F Where the hard drive clicks and grinds every other minute Where the mouse is 4" too high, and the keyboard 5" too far away
All of those are 'comfort' issues
Incidentally, they are also efficiency issues, as well as performance issues. High performance and high efficiency are correlated, though not necessarily causally linked.
A system that wastes half it's power as heat, noise, and vibration, vs the same system that wastes only 1/4 of it's power as heat, noise, and vibration... the latter system should outperform the first system by 1/4.
So comfort, performance, and efficiency are all intricately connected. You cannot use an uncomfortable system for extended periods of time, without injuring yourself (noise, headaches, vision problems, attention span, repetitive stress injuries, etc), and a system that is grossly inefficient is a tremendous waste.
Until you heard about this, did you have any real sense of the size and scale of our solar system?
How about the rest of Slashdot?
How about for those building this thing?
How about for those who visit this thing?
Imagine how tedious it is to walk from the earth to Mars, and then scale that to interplanetary scales, not even taking into account periphelion and aphelion, and gravity slingshots and lagrange tubes.
I mean, are you going to similarly argue that museums that only display known things is worthless?
You assume that your demographic describes Slashdot, and you assume that what doesn't interest you, doesn't interest Slashdot.
Firstly, you don't know the demographic of Slashdot, most especially if you're complaining about an article posted in http://apple.slashdot.org, and not at http://slashdot.org.
Secondly, even if you *know* the demographic of Slashdot, the posts are at the discretion of our 'editors'/overlords. What they think is cool or newsworthy is posted; what you think is cool or newsworthy is much less important, though you do have your chance to submit to them, but in the end it is still their discretion.
That of course is besides the point. People who use Final Cut Pro 3 will look forward to and enjoy this post about the near release of Final Cut Pro 4, regardless of what you may feel.
Probably wait until the support contract with Sun expires, and then save a whole bunch of money, as well as a poster child for other similar kinds of stores?
Um, well, I've never used Windows 9x, only NT and 2k; my dad is running a copy of 2k SP3 that I keep maintained for him. I follow the news regarding the Outlook/IE/IIS trojans/viruses/worms, and have him using web-based hotmail, Mozilla, and keep his system patched for him.
2k is a fine OS, but I haven't seen anything in the past 2 years (2000 was released in 2000, and it is 2003 already) that have made me decided to trust them...
Playing 'hard to get' is in Apple's best interests; but it's also a good idea not to 'put all your eggs in one basket', and as such, Apple shouldn't spurn Motorola outright. 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush', and right now Motorola is a known quantity, and IBM is an unknown.
Except of course that Apple is probably using both XServe 1U kit and XServe RAID 3U kit to run the iTunes Music Store... so faulting Apple for lack of RAID when they have (and probably) use RAID for iTMS isn't really fair.
Apple designs two systems for two problems (one for compute, network, and load and one for storage, reliability, and capacity) with one OS and set of software to tie the two.
Go ahead and do what you will, it's your conscience.
I've got musician and artist friends, and they'd like to see some cash for their efforts, even if it's only enough to live by, so the concept of paying is one I'm comfortable with.
Heck, I work in software, and I'd like people to pay me for my efforts instead of downloading from each other for free.
I never said I didn't trust anything... I meant, if you don't initially trust the patches a company makes (for whatever reason), will you trust the unsolicited and unverified comments on a system *run* by the selfsame company?
I trust the comments on Slashdot, slightly, because it isn't outright owned by Microsoft.
I trust the comments on Ars Technica more, because it isn't run by Microsoft and because the people on there have proven themselves technically adept over the course of multiple years.
But if there was a site actually run by Microsoft, I am at least going to be skeptical of astroturfing, censorship, and bad moderation; to be perfectly fair, I also have to be skeptical of anti-Microsoft folk who might try to skew the data the other way, too.
Slashdot Mirror
Asians who eat dairy products are SARS flags now?
The only reason Apple is using AAC is because it is an obscure format which tends to lock users into a Mac/iPod solution.
No, the only reason Apple is using AAC is because it's an open, documented, non vendor-locked format that cannot be simply hijacked and manipulated by, say, Microsoft.
AAC is cross platform; in fact, AAC is the logical successor to MP3, so everything you love or hate about MP3, ideologically, should apply to AAC. To think otherwise seems silly and ignorant to me.
I never said 128kbps from master was higher quality than 128kbps from CD, I only said it was arguable.
And there are two variables here, not one, as your analogy suggests.
Not only are we measuring the quality of 128kbps VBR encoded from master by Apple's exclusive software... we are comparing against a population that listens to and enjoys music on FM radio!
So the whole idea of 'ear for music' is largely elitist and artifical. Music is more than just fidelity, just like software quality is more than zero defects.
Music is rhythm, melody, lyrics, atmosphere, and energy, as well, and fidelity only matters in how effective those aspects are conveyed to the listener.
Yeah, it's interesting as I'm one of the few adult Asians I know who *isn't* lactose intolerant.
Ice cream, milk, cheese... I love them all.
You've actually listenened to AAC files and think they're shitty :)
Most of the population (at least 90% I bet) haven't had access to a Mac, the iTunes Music Store, or Apple encoded AACs, and thus the complaints of most folk are... probably purely speculative.
Myself, I find AAC by iTunes is >> MP3 by iTunes, and AAC by Apple is ~> than AAC by iTunes and MP3 by iTunes.
It is worthy to note that I'm not using LAME, so my basis for quality is already lower than yours.
It doesn't sound like you use a Mac or the iTunes Music Store, so why do you say the AACs from Apple are shitty?
There are at least three distinct things to keep in mind:
MP3s encoded from your music using LAME at 220kbps VBR is one quality
AACs encoded with Quicktime 6.3 is one quality
AACs encoded from masters, ala iTunes Music Store, are another quality
You, in one sentence, mix all three quality levels as if they are currently comparable.
The music from the iTunes music store is encoded from a higher quality source, and can arguably be of higher quality than even your 220kbps mp3s. It's hard to make any educated guess because I don't know anyone who's done a comparison between AAC files ripped from masters vs MP3s ripped from CD.
The music you get from iTunes itself is based on Quicktime 6.3, and that *is* being compared and characterized in this test; this will probably illustrate the level of quality iTunes for Windows will have, and is more directly comparable to your 220kbps mp3s, but only *after* the test is performed.
it's fine to believe that your mp3s are better, but there is no proof yet.
That was a flippant answer to his seeming flippant post.
I like Ogg fine. It is my codec of choice, except of course that no one bothers to support it for my OS of choice, OS X.
There's no good Ogg encoders that can interface with iTunes and support Unicode (yet, of course)
There's no Ogg codec for Quicktime on OS X 10.2.6 (yet, of course)
I much prefer Ogg, ideologically, but it's not something I can actually *live* with, because the support isn't there.
I have 100% support for MP3 and AAC.
Yes, I believe in fighting for causes I believe in. Right now Ogg is not one of those causes; maybe later. Right now I'm more concerned with my friends, my mortgage, and my state of unemployment, sorry.
Well, if you don't care about the quality, why the heck does it matter if Ogg has good or bad quality?
All it needs to be is open and unencumbered, right?
Well, the AAC produced by Apple Quicktime isn't DRM burdened, even if it does have some patent stuff attached.
I've been suggesting this for years, and have done it several times myself.
:)
Export from Outlook/Outlook Express into Eudora, and from Eudora into Mail.
I used Eudora for a looong time exactly because it was cross compatible across platforms and versions. My mailboxes from 1996 are still readable in Eudora in 2003
But Mail is just too darned convenient, so I switched last year; same with Mozilla/Safari.
So a computer that sounds like a jet engine is okay
Or that vibrates like a jackhammer
Or a screen that flickers like mad
Or where the power supply buzzes
Or where the monitor is 5" too tall, 10" too close
Where the machine is like a space heater, and it's already 80F
Where the hard drive clicks and grinds every other minute
Where the mouse is 4" too high, and the keyboard 5" too far away
All of those are 'comfort' issues
Incidentally, they are also efficiency issues, as well as performance issues. High performance and high efficiency are correlated, though not necessarily causally linked.
A system that wastes half it's power as heat, noise, and vibration, vs the same system that wastes only 1/4 of it's power as heat, noise, and vibration... the latter system should outperform the first system by 1/4.
So comfort, performance, and efficiency are all intricately connected. You cannot use an uncomfortable system for extended periods of time, without injuring yourself (noise, headaches, vision problems, attention span, repetitive stress injuries, etc), and a system that is grossly inefficient is a tremendous waste.
Education
Edification
Realization
Wonder
Until you heard about this, did you have any real sense of the size and scale of our solar system?
How about the rest of Slashdot?
How about for those building this thing?
How about for those who visit this thing?
Imagine how tedious it is to walk from the earth to Mars, and then scale that to interplanetary scales, not even taking into account periphelion and aphelion, and gravity slingshots and lagrange tubes.
I mean, are you going to similarly argue that museums that only display known things is worthless?
Take a look at this then.
Talks about some of the points of the talk.
You assume that your demographic describes Slashdot, and you assume that what doesn't interest you, doesn't interest Slashdot.
Firstly, you don't know the demographic of Slashdot, most especially if you're complaining about an article posted in http://apple.slashdot.org, and not at http://slashdot.org.
Secondly, even if you *know* the demographic of Slashdot, the posts are at the discretion of our 'editors'/overlords. What they think is cool or newsworthy is posted; what you think is cool or newsworthy is much less important, though you do have your chance to submit to them, but in the end it is still their discretion.
That of course is besides the point. People who use Final Cut Pro 3 will look forward to and enjoy this post about the near release of Final Cut Pro 4, regardless of what you may feel.
How is this different from fink?
sudo fink install orbit
It downloads the orbit source, compiles, and installs it.
Probably wait until the support contract with Sun expires, and then save a whole bunch of money, as well as a poster child for other similar kinds of stores?
At some point in the past this wasn't true; the PPC970 was a 'new' CPU, a retrofit of Altivec onto a scaled Power4 core :)
Apple is different than Sam Goody's or Tower.
You can pay for what you use, rather than for the entire thing, and you can sample everything before you buy.
Can you only buy individual tracks off CDs at Tower?
Can you listen to a 30 second preview before you buy at Sam Goody?
And on the distribution side, Apple has done something good for the artists; they cut out 4 levels of distribution:
Manufacturing
Packaging
Distribution
Shelf Space
and replaced it with one:
Distribution
Reduce costs means increased margins, somewhere, for Apple and for the artists, as well as the labels.
Um, well, I've never used Windows 9x, only NT and 2k; my dad is running a copy of 2k SP3 that I keep maintained for him. I follow the news regarding the Outlook/IE/IIS trojans/viruses/worms, and have him using web-based hotmail, Mozilla, and keep his system patched for him.
2k is a fine OS, but I haven't seen anything in the past 2 years (2000 was released in 2000, and it is 2003 already) that have made me decided to trust them...
Playing 'hard to get' is in Apple's best interests; but it's also a good idea not to 'put all your eggs in one basket', and as such, Apple shouldn't spurn Motorola outright. 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush', and right now Motorola is a known quantity, and IBM is an unknown.
So perhaps the best course is to...
Keep Motorola
Bet on IBM
Plan around both
Yes, yes, but hardware control doesn't explain IE, IIS, Outlook exploits, does it?
Or buffer overflows?
Or HTML/Javascript/ActiveX vulnerabilities, right?
Except of course that Apple is probably using both XServe 1U kit and XServe RAID 3U kit to run the iTunes Music Store... so faulting Apple for lack of RAID when they have (and probably) use RAID for iTMS isn't really fair.
Apple designs two systems for two problems (one for compute, network, and load and one for storage, reliability, and capacity) with one OS and set of software to tie the two.
Ah, well then.
Go ahead and do what you will, it's your conscience.
I've got musician and artist friends, and they'd like to see some cash for their efforts, even if it's only enough to live by, so the concept of paying is one I'm comfortable with.
Heck, I work in software, and I'd like people to pay me for my efforts instead of downloading from each other for free.
I've got nothing to bitch about, really, I haven't used Microsoft in two years now.
Are you trying to tell me that Microsoft, in the past two years, has become a more reliable, trustworthy, and capable software provider?
I never said I didn't trust anything... I meant, if you don't initially trust the patches a company makes (for whatever reason), will you trust the unsolicited and unverified comments on a system *run* by the selfsame company?
I trust the comments on Slashdot, slightly, because it isn't outright owned by Microsoft.
I trust the comments on Ars Technica more, because it isn't run by Microsoft and because the people on there have proven themselves technically adept over the course of multiple years.
But if there was a site actually run by Microsoft, I am at least going to be skeptical of astroturfing, censorship, and bad moderation; to be perfectly fair, I also have to be skeptical of anti-Microsoft folk who might try to skew the data the other way, too.
Hmm, sorta like a Slashdot comment/moderation kinda thing?
That would be *interesting*, but the issue is, if you don't trust the company issuing the patch, would you trust the comments on that patch system?
I go to Ars Technica to read coments on patches and updates before I update, myself.