===================================================
= NB: Over 50% of this message is QUOTED, please =
= be more selective when quoting text =
===================================================
I'm sorry but i believe there is one thing that nobody has mentioned yet,
that is that there are already sooooooo many mp3 encoders out there that
people already have, if Fraunhofer tried to find everyone that had an
encoder already they wouldn't be able to do it, that and the fact that there
are already sooo many mp3's they cant affect that either. People aren't
just gonna say "oh my gosh Fraunhofer own's this piece of software i've been
using for 3 years my god i need to send them all my money and never listen
to another mp3 again, i've been a bad boy" reality is that the encoders are
out there, people will use them, if people like more comes out and is
readily available people will use it. for me i'd rather not have something
that sounds nasty and uses expensive solid state media, i'll stick with my
MD.
-----Original Message-----
From: Romain Kang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, April 27, 2000 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: MD: the death of MP3
>
>I don't think anyone claimed that MP3 was the last word in digital
>audio formats, and if Fraunhofer's licensing becomes too restrictive,
>the world will find something else to replace it. In the end, if
>the open standards are compelling, they will prevail. For instance,
>if Gopher had been free, we might be using that today instead of HTTP,
>and the worldwide web would be somewhat different.
>
>MD/ATRAC's advantage at this point is that you can store more bits in a
>form factor that is very convenient, so the fidelity is typically better
>than portable (i.e., low bitrate) MP3's. Once there is something that
>sounds "good enough" and stores more music, I believe the general public
>will find that more compelling than MD/ATRAC.
>
>There are other compressed audio formats that could find an opportunity
>if Fraunhofer were to choke off MP3. For example, there's Dolby AAC,
>used in equipment like broadcast digicarts, and Philips PASC, invented
>for DCC -- remember that? DCC is dead, so how much would Philips have
>to lose if they were to adapt PASC to lower bitrates and open the
>licensing? (Hypothetical point -- PASC technology might not be
>amenable to such extensions). Philips could always save the latest and
>best versions to the folks who paid big licensing royalties, and allow
>the free software zealots to dink with the open versions.
>
>I believe that there must be an compresed, open digital audio format
>because the general direction of progress points that way. The evolution
>of societies and commerce point to a world where the middlemen are
>gradually squeezed thinner and thinner. (Tea traders in the 18th
>century were pretty hot stuff, remember?) In this century, the record
>labels are getting in the way of musical creativity, and growing fat
>because of it. But how many recording artists are actually making more
>money because of increased unit prices on CDs in the past few years?
>This is why MP3 or its successors are compelling, not because of piracy.
>
>Raising a battle cry of "MD Forever!" will be merely holding the Maginot
>Line unless MD and ATRAC evolve to meet the challenges that will arise.
>Anyone who claims otherwise probably hasn't lived long enough to watch
>a favorite technology superceded by a newer one.
>
>Romain Kang Siemens Info/Comm Products, San Jose R&D
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] formerly Pyramid Technology Corp.
>
>Disclaimer: I represent myself alone, except where otherwise indicated.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
>"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
