|
|
Posted by NRen2k5 on 12/08/05 21:00
void * clvrmnky() wrote:
> On 07/12/2005 9:06 PM, NRen2k5 wrote:
>
>> news wrote:
>>
>>> CES said the following on 07/12/2005 09:25 pm:
>
> [...]
>
>>> There is a flac plugin for iTunes, but I doubt iPods would support it.
>>
>>
>> The OP didn't make any mention of iTunes or iPod. Sure, they're
>> popular, but don't just go out and assume that the OP would want to
>> use such garbage if he could just as easily avoid it.
>>
> No, really. Tell us how you really feel.
Nah. I'll just let the facts speak for themselves:
- iTunes started off as "SoundJam".
- SoundJam (and now iTunes) has a lousy MP3 encoder. Not much better
than the ISO reference sourcem actually.
- Apple refuses to improve the MP3 encoder, because having such a
terrible MP3 encoder makes their MP4 encoder seem even better.
- All iPods from fourth generation onwards have a bug that makes VBR MP3
playback occasionally stutter.
- The iPod Nano is ridiculously fragile.
- iPods have barely more than half the battery life of other MP3 players
on the market.
- iPods are incapable of playing WMA-DRM (which all "online music
stores" except for iTunes use).
- iPods don't even natively support WMA.
- iTunes doesn't support MP3 players other than the iPod.
And just for fun:
- New Apple computers use Intel processors.
- Where's the Mac gaming community? Happy with Warcraft? How many
*years* do you figure before you get Half Life 2?
I wouldn't really call the iPod an MP3 player so much as I would call it
an overpriced children's toy.
My opinion of Apple can be summed up in two words:
"Restrictive" and "inferior".
The truth hurts, doesn't it?
- NRen2k5
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|