The funny thing about that, is that microsoft did write the first versions of OS/2 for IBM. Go figure...

Frank van Gestel

The funny thing about that, is that microsoft did write the first versions of OS/2 for IBM. Go figure...

Well, they helped, and thats why IBM ran off with file system code that didn't need defragging when they split their relationship, while MS had to write NTFS for NT 3.1

All Windows was originally meant to do was get consumers use to a mouse until they could push OS/2 out the door, since it was delayed by quite a bit. But somewhere along the line IBM and Microsoft got angry at each other and took what they had of the OS/2 code and released something with it. For IBM, OS/2 Warp 3, and MS started NT.

tanstaafl,

Contrary to popular opinion, Microsoft has not been the innovators or even leaders of the last 20 years. The leaders in marketshare perhaps, but that's about it.

You mention having shared printer drivers. The Macintosh had this feature for many years prior to any Microsoft product.

What about a windowing system? Microsoft was dead last there. Macintosh had a usable window system years before MS ever did. So did nearly every desktop operating system: Amiga, RISC OS, Atari ST, NeXT, X-Windows, etc. During the late 80's nearly every desktop system used windows, except for Microsoft's users-- they all were still stuck using DOS.

Pre-emptive Multitasking? With the notable exception of the Mac, Microsoft was again nearly dead last to introduce this feature to their user base. The Amiga offered this in 1985, 10 years before Microsoft would offer this to their general user base!

What about the web? Again, Microsoft was last again. I recall seeing an interview with Gates around 94 where he claimed the Internet was "insignificant" and "only useful for academa" and how it will "never amount to someting useful for the average home user". And we all know how Microsoft was one the last companies to have a web strategy or even acknowledge the importance of it-- they waited until '95 to address this issue!

That's not leadership, and it's nothing to be proud of. The only thing they have to be proud of is making lots of money-- not bettering computing for all mankind.

Can we take this elsewhere? This is an empeg BBS, not a Microsoft-advocacy group.


Roger - not necessarily speaking for empeg

My appologies for the extended rant. But I feel I speak for many others who are dissapointed by SonicBlue's decision to support WMA.

While I will admit it doesn't seem very likely that WMA will crush the MP3 format, over the last 15 years I have watched the same thing happen again and again when Microsoft sets its mind to something. Personally, I would not discount Microsoft's efforts to make WMA the dominate format.

I understand SonicBlue's desire to support a potentially popular format in order to complete in the marketplace. However, WMA format is just that: a potentially popular format. Why it has to be supported before even proving itself popular is somewhat perplexing. Obviously, SonicBlue management are tuned into and believe in Microsoft's plans enough to help them out.

And this is disappointing because many us thought empeg was a cool company. Not a company leading the way to support a format that may eventually force a DIVX security model for music upon everyone.

That's the last I will say on this subject for now.

agree wholeheartedly

Henno
mk2 6 nr 6

I think that it has been stated that the decision to support WMA was empeg's and not SonicBlue. It was made before the purchase of empeg, ltd.

32GB (JUST UPGRADED!) Mk. II BLUE
Detroit, MI USA
www.PfeifferBeer.com

Whoah, it wasn't their decision - we had WMA support lined up as empeg before any SONICblue involvement.

WMA *is* popular, and is getting more so due to the bundling of a fairly good music manager (wmp7/8) with winME and onwards. Lots of people use the stuff they get with their system - eg, iTunes on the mac, and not supporting WMA because it has DRM possibilities (note - we don't support DRM protected files as yet) is very short-sighted.

Most music companies are not going to release commerical music digitally without some kind of DRM. To limit the use of the empeg player to files people have encoded themselves *ONLY* (or obtained illegally via napster & equivalents) is a very short-sighted decision.

In the future, when you can download music and it *is* less hassle than buying the CD and ripping it, are we really going to place ourselves at a huge commercial disadvantage by not supporting these files?

MP3 isn't free - you have to pay for both encoders and decoders (with the exception of free PC player apps). Just because we pay Thompson as opposed to Microsoft doesn't make it any less a format controlled by a large company. Thompson have various plans including licence fees on mp3 radio stations too...

Hugo

>we had WMA support lined up as empeg before any SONICblue involvement

Yes. And I complained about it back then too.

http://cryptome.org/sdmi-attack.htm appears to be the future
of DRM, i.e. nothing except strong-arm legal tactics without
any technical measures whatsoever.

I'm pragmatic and realise you are doing this because you believe
it's commercially necessary. I just believe you are digging
your own grave.

Paul

Maybe I am missing something here. But last time I checked, the empeg with WMA support will still play MP3 files. If you personally are not going to use the WMA feature, the decision to add it won't affect you in any way. The 1.1 upgrade is going to be free, and I am sure that if empeg ever releases an upgrade that they need to charge for, the feature they are needing to charge will be optional.

And even if empeg had to sign a strict contract about WMA, theres no way they could force empeg to take out MP3 support.

And skipping the legality of anything like this, if the contract did allow full control of the empeg once WMA is added, just hold on to a pre-WMA upgrade file.

If WMA becomes dominate, so what? Just like today in the browser war, I am free to use Netscape or Opera in the face of the dominate IE. Sure I don't like how MS got IE to where it is today, but it's also not something I'm forced to use.

In any case, I don't see how adding WMA will in any way harm us as the users, or empeg as a product or company.

In reply to:

---

My appologies for the extended rant. But I feel I speak for many others who are dissapointed by SonicBlue's decision to support WMA.

While I will admit it doesn't seem very likely that WMA will crush the MP3 format, over the last 15 years I have watched the same thing happen again and again when Microsoft sets its mind to something. Personally, I would not discount Microsoft's efforts to make WMA the dominate format.

I understand SonicBlue's desire to support a potentially popular format in order to complete in the marketplace. However, WMA format is just that: a potentially popular format. Why it has to be supported before even proving itself popular is somewhat perplexing. Obviously, SonicBlue management are tuned into and believe in Microsoft's plans enough to help them out.

And this is disappointing because many us thought empeg was a cool company. Not a company leading the way to support a format that may eventually force a DIVX security model for music upon everyone.

---

First, I agree that Microsoft's claims at innovation are mostly laughable, that they use their size in very dirty way to strangle technologically superior competition, that our computing environment would have been much better today had not IBM decided to elevate a certain geek to the level of their OS suplier by tasking him to clone CP/M and so on.

But:

Believe it or not, both empeg and SonicBlue were founded not in order to lead holly war against the Evil Empire, but to make money. I don't perceive them any less cool because of that, since they do it (especially empeg, of course) in uniquely customer-friendly and responsible way.

WMA with its copy protection, serial copy management or whatever will probably succeed to squize MP3 out of online music distribution market (such at it exists). I don't care for that very much, since I don't rely on copying music someone else has bought online. Choice of format in which I will encode music from my own CDs will stay mine, and, at least for the time being, I think I will stay with MP3 (but see bellow). Moreover, if I do buy music online, I don't care if I can copy it from the original file in only two or three generations - I only need it on my empeg and PC disk backup.

Music megacompanies (our real enemy here, not M$) will, of course, continue trying to make us pay for our music when we buy it, backup it, listen to it, think of it... I think I read on this board that some were already testing the waters with new, propriatery CD formats that would make ripping and empeg-feeding more difficult, with predictable catastrophic result. Installed base of CD players is too large to allow for that. Of course, there is danger that they will ultimatively succeed in pushing something new, with perceived technical advantages (audio-DVD or whatever). Then, the only venue of action will be defending fair use of our music at court. WMA has nothing to do with it.

Next, WMA is superior format for some purposes. My home machine is temporaryly a Win98 that was gathering dust untill my Linux laptop died, so I had chance to actually listen to some low-bitrate WMA files (samples from CDNOW). Well, at 20kb/s WMA sounds like AM radio or slightly better, RealAudio like Edison phonograph played through bad analog telephone line, and MP3 does not work at all at such low rate. So, it would seem that for high-volume/low-quality applications (say, audio books), WMA might currently be format of choice.

Finally, don't forget that good German ladies and gentleman at Frauhofen Institute still hold our metaphorical balls, since they are copyright holders for MP3 technology and might choose to charge for it whatever they want (or more likely, what they feel the market will take). In this sense, WMA might even be our ally, by keeping FI folks from becomming too greedy.

OK, enough ranting.

Cheers!

Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
Q#5196, MkII#80000376, 18GB green

]Thompson have various plans including licence fees on mp3 radio stations too...

but T donot have the power to squeeze everybody else out of the market, even if they have the intent (which I doubt).

Moreover, WMA may be adequate at low bit rates; it is said that it doesn't match the quality of other codecs at high bit rates. It doesnt make sense to *not* use the full potential of your player. Storage gets cheaper every day.

Henno
mk2 6 nr 6

Finally, don't forget that good German ladies and gentleman at Frauhofen Institute still hold our metaphorical balls, since they are copyright holders for MP3 technology and might choose to charge for it whatever they want (or more likely, what they feel the market will take).

As far as I remember, the German governement placed conditions on the grant given to the Institute for the development of the format; I believe that they were required to hold copyright but not exploit the format commercially.

They are allowed to charge for tools, such as encoders, decoders, etc. I think the intention was to prevent the same situation as the "GIF" charade a few years ago, which was resented big time in Germany when the copyright holder suddenly tried to apply commercial exploitation tactics on a de-facto standard.

One of the few remaining Mk1 owners... #00015

...Thompson, however, who co-developed it, *are* allowed to charge whatever they want for it. Much like AAC, who use Dolby to deal with their licencing; the reasoning is that Dolby have done this for ages and have good lawyers...

Hugo

I don't think we are; time will tell. If MS try to do anything like tying codecs to OS choice, the EU (at the very least) will sort them out - I have a lot more faith in the EU's anti-monopoly powers than the US's...

Hugo

I didn't know these details, but what they seem to boil down to, I am affraid, is that we still might end up in gif-like situation with MP3, right? So, competition among open, semi-open and proprietary formats might not be such a bad thing, even if the behemoth we all like to hate is behind one of them :-)

Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
Q#5196, MkII#80000376, 18GB green