Wma Files?
- Thread starter OmarNawaz
- Start date
jmetal88
Erm.... Woohoo!
It was supposed to, but GPH couldn't afford the licensing fees.
reaper79
Rectum? Damn near killed ''em!
Yeah, that was a little GPH BSing. Too bad, cause it would have been nice, but I'd rather keep the GP2X cost down and just use MP3s.
xafier
Member
hmm, I wouldn't have thought that WMA would have been possible even if they did buy the license... wouldn't the codec have to be written for ARM Linux? I highly doubt Microsoft would write a codec for Linux...
I think there's open source decoders for some WMV formats, but not necessarily the newer ones. But the thing is, it may have to be modified to use the acceleration hardware, otherwise it may be unwatchable, kinda like how the dreamcast could barely pull off 320x240 divx with a 200 mhz SH4, after tons of optimizing.
FluffyPanda
I have 6 little blue things. W00t.
Personally I don't really care. WMA and WMV are abominations that should be excluded from as many devices as possible to speed their demise. OGG and Xvid are ideal, mp3 and Divx are acceptable because they are too wide spread to ignore and they are both actually technically good formats anyway.
Drak
fff
Mp3s dont have any compression when I download them.. So I use sony sound forge to convert em to 128kb [same compression as ogg, and wma. as well as file size.]
It works just fine and doesnt take long at all.. Just do a batch encode and select the folders where your music is in.
I even converted my wmas, and oggs to mp3. So I can use them with madplay!
It works just fine and doesnt take long at all.. Just do a batch encode and select the folders where your music is in.
I even converted my wmas, and oggs to mp3. So I can use them with madplay!
nickspoon
vultum stultum habes
I convert my MP3 to 32Kbps. Yes, I like files small. And I can't really hear that much difference (possibly a slight fuzz in louder songs, but not much), and the files go from around 3MB to 400KB. I use Sorenson Squeeze, which I got for making flv files, but it works just as well.
Drak
fff
Hmm interesting.. I never really tried to go any less than cd quality im gonig to have to give that a try!
Last edited by a moderator:
reallynotnick
The smartest newb
Wow, just wow. *looks at his 128Kbps AAC files* and I thought those were not perfect. I don't know how you can stand that, but I guess it is your music and not mine so do what you like with them. By any chance are you making them Mono? Then I would almost understand how you don't mind the quality.
I myself don't care at all about all the windows media junk, straight up Quicktime right here. I myself want H.264 support and AAC.
Oh well theres my 2 cents.
EDIT: This is post number 500! woot
I have no life
h34r:
Last edited by a moderator:
i would like to have wmv and wma support, mainly for the fact that i download and watch a lot of stuff from channel9 which is wmv only. I seem to remember that you can mplayer to work with these formats on linux , so surely its a matter of time before they "appear" on the gp2x ......
As for GPH could they not have offered a updated mplayer as a premium bundle with the appropiate licences ? Maybe a download or something , and charge the additional licence fee only to the people who want to use it ?
Mark
As for GPH could they not have offered a updated mplayer as a premium bundle with the appropiate licences ? Maybe a download or something , and charge the additional licence fee only to the people who want to use it ?
Mark
Mr Doctor
Member
Jebus!
Do you just listen to really low-fi music, or only listen to music through the 2X speakers or did you take some ear shrapnel in the war?
Some files encoded at 128 annoy me sometimes (mainly in the high end like cymbols) because of the frequency loss (128 is *not* CD quality no matter what anyone tells you, 160 is very close though). I never rip anything at less than 192.
Last edited by a moderator:
nickspoon
vultum stultum habes
I don't use my 2X for music, anyway. I have this shitty 64MB MP3 player from some two years ago, and whether I put on 192 Kbps or 32 Kbps files doesn't matter. Plus, I can fit around 60 songs on there.Jebus!
Do you just listen to really low-fi music, or only listen to music through the 2X speakers or did you take some ear shrapnel in the war?
Some files encoded at 128 annoy me sometimes (mainly in the high end like cymbols) because of the frequency loss (128 is *not* CD quality no matter what anyone tells you, 160 is very close though). I never rip anything at less than 192.
Last edited by a moderator:
FluffyPanda
I have 6 little blue things. W00t.
Hmmmmmm.... Quicktime.
Personally I don't think much more of Apple's media formats than Microsoft's. They are both proprietary, DRM enabled (infested?) and offer precious little that you can't find in OSS.
Actually, Apple may be worse because they make you pay for quicktime pro if you want to do such basic things as save a link to a streaming media file. Quicktime for windows also installs icons all over the place and just generally blows really. MS Media Player might not be perfect, but it is at least free (as in beer) and version 10 offers you at least a little respect in not spreading itself all over your computer and then spying on you.
Last edited by a moderator:
shrubberyrobbery
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2005
- Messages
- 174
eauurgh. so 192 kbps sounds hardly better than 32 kbps? maybe you should stop listening to it underwater? :lol:
Yeah, fluffypanda, I agree: death to closed file-formats! hooray for mp3 and ogg!
Last edited by a moderator:
Shotgun Dingo
Still Fresh
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 31
Except MP3 is a patented, proprietary format, and AAC (which Apple uses in some cases) is an open standard... Oops.
Oops.
