|
|
Ogg sucks
No disrespect intended to the author of this hint, but I think ogg sucks and I don't know why so many people are bending over backwards to adopt it. Mp3 is the standard and it works perfectly well. Why all this fervour for ogg?
Ogg sucks
Part of it **is** that OGG is better in some ranges of the audio spectrum - this is what studies/reports have found over the years. (DISCLAIMER: I am a MacOSX and Solaris user, and have NO OGG files, plus I'm over 40 and my hearing is going. I don't care who's audio is best 'cause I can't hear it anyway. No flamewars please!)
Ogg sucks
Lesse, arguably better sound format without patents
Ogg sucks
Yes, Ogg (free) has been adopted SOOO much faster than mp3 (patented). Here's a fun one. Go to www.amazon.com or www.ebay.com and search EVERYTHING for ogg. You will see not a single result relating to Ogg Vorbis--NOTHING.
Not a flame war--like the person above, I can't hear the difference and I don't care. But please don't use flawed expressions like Free is good. Gets adopted more widely. Still, I think it would be GREAT to get ogg support into iTunes, especially encoding. ---gralem
Ogg sucks
The notion of it being free is only good for developers. People are supposed to pay licenses (or the company that makes the software is supposed to) if they use *any* mp3 decoder or encoder now (see thompson licensing) but nobody does. sigh.
As for the quality, if you've seen the forums at hydrogen audio (where the developers of LAME, vorbis, aac, mpc, flac, etc. encoders hang out) then you would know that ogg vorbis is the superior to mp3 at all bitrates. If you cannot hear the difference, then fine stick with mp3 for convenience, but don't dismiss the technical superiority of vorbis based on this. Ogg files that vbr around 170-180 can easily be equivalent to mp3s of 224 kbps. As for lowbitrate streaming... the quality of ogg vorbis even beats real media. If people are seriously going to criticize vorbis, then at least do some hard testing and be a little more knowledgeable.
Ogg sucks
I've done a lot of comparison listening, and found ogg to be superiour in audio quality at most bitrates. I think ogg Q 4.99 is a great balance between file size and audio quality. 4.99 retains cross-channel coupling, so the file size is smaller than a 192kbs mp3, yet is high enough q to be noticabley better sounding.
Ogg sucks
I see that you would encode your music in the popular, but patent encumbered,
Ogg sucks
Although I haven't noticed a difference and have always been content with mp3, I use ogg because one of my favorite bands as a download site with everything in ogg. So, whether it sucks or not is irrevevant. I want that music, so I use ogg to get it. Better than not being able to download the music I want. |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:HintsNo new hintsComments last 2 daysLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.14 seconds |
|