Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #328501 > unrolled thread

Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago

Started bycc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com>
First post2015-10-26 05:03 -0700
Last post2015-10-27 08:55 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 166 — 19 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy


Contents

  Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-26 05:03 -0700
    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-26 10:09 -0400
      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 13:33 -0700
      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 16:49 -0500
        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 15:18 -0700
        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-26 19:03 -0400
          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-26 21:27 -0500
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 02:46 +0000
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:57 -0400
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-26 20:50 -0700
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 07:56 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:49 -0400
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 11:52 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:29 -0500
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:02 +0100
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:44 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:59 +0100
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:11 +0000
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:23 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:15 +0000
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-29 19:39 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:37 -0400
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:09 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-28 12:11 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 17:38 +0100
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:54 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:05 +0100
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 13:09 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 13:30 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 14:22 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 15:48 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Normal Peelman" <norm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 23:49 +0100
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:43 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2015-10-28 03:17 +0100
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 13:15 -0700
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:00 +0000
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-27 22:06 +0000
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 04:45 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:07 -0700
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:40 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-27 21:24 +0100
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:31 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:04 -0500
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:27 -0500
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:13 -0700
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 11:58 -0400
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:32 -0500
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:38 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 17:04 +0100
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:34 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 18:57 +0100
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 13:06 -0500
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:18 -0400
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 14:33 -0700
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 23:30 +0100
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 19:01 -0400
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-28 00:20 +0100
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 16:57 -0700
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 20:06 -0400
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-28 14:03 +0100
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 09:09 -0400
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-28 14:28 +0100
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 09:36 -0400
                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:17 -0500
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:22 -0600
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 10:44 -0400
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:08 -0700
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:15 -0500
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:20 -0600
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 01:45 +0100
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 17:49 -0700
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-27 23:55 +0000
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 08:34 -0400
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-10-29 19:52 +0000
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:11 -0500
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-28 09:49 -0700
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:17 +0000
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 13:43 -0400
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-27 23:45 -0600
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 08:53 -0400
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:20 -0500
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:24 -0600
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 06:53 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 09:07 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:25 -0600
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 21:24 -0400
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:08 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:21 +0000
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 11:32 -0700
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-27 23:18 +0100
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 16:53 -0700
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 11:28 -0700
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-27 21:22 +0100
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 14:21 -0700
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:29 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-10-27 15:07 -0700
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 05:03 +0000
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-28 11:26 +0000
          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 08:09 -0700
            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 11:57 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 09:50 -0700
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-27 13:05 -0400
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:43 -0400
              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 11:30 -0500
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 10:20 -0700
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:45 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-27 13:43 -0500
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 12:21 -0700
                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 14:21 -0500
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 15:12 -0500
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-27 13:38 -0700
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-28 10:33 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 17:22 -0400
                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 11:01 -0500
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 11:39 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-28 11:45 -0500
                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 12:48 -0400
                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 12:12 -0500
                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:55 +0000
                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 14:22 -0400
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-28 16:57 -0400
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-28 17:52 -0400
                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 20:17 -0500
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 10:09 +0100
                                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:46 +0000
                                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 14:50 +0100
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 09:54 -0400
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 13:59 +0000
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-10-29 15:21 +0100
                                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 14:24 +0000
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 10:00 -0500
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:05 +0000
                                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-29 11:27 -0400
                                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:02 -0400
                                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 11:22 -0500
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:14 +0000
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 15:43 +0000
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 12:24 -0400
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-29 16:32 +0000
                                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:33 -0400
                                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 13:51 -0500
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-29 10:45 -0700
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 08:32 -0400
                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 20:15 -0500
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 08:22 -0400
                                      Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 08:31 -0400
                                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 08:37 -0400
                                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 08:40 -0400
                                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 09:10 -0400
                                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 09:19 -0400
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 10:44 -0400
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2015-10-29 08:26 -0700
                                                    Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-29 12:26 -0400
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 09:57 -0500
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-10-29 15:48 +0000
                                            Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 09:55 -0500
                                              Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-10-29 12:00 -0400
                                                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-29 11:20 -0500
                                                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-29 12:15 -0500
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-10-28 17:14 +0000
                          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-10-28 12:10 -0500
                        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-10-28 18:27 -0600
                Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago Charmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-10-27 13:37 -0400
                  Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-10-27 13:59 -0400
        Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-10-27 07:00 -0500
          Re: Comments from iPod announcement 14 years ago DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-10-27 08:55 -0400

Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9  Next page →


#328854

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-27 09:50 -0700
Message-ID<0873c800-9e8a-483c-bb34-df656af4138f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328845
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 9:57:18 AM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:

(snip)

> I'm one of the few people who can hear the difference between a file
> compressed at 192kbps and one compressed at 320kbps.

LOL! No dude, sorry... I've proven this isn't always the case when I pointed to that audio file of me on guitar, which wasn't a recorded audio sound coming *from* the guitar that I played it on.  This was a patch from a Logic plugin that was triggered by one of my Godin's (LGX-SA). 

You: "The guitar sounds amazing. Is that a 320kbps MP3 encoded with LAME?"

As the response shows, it was 160kbps. 

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/imu2wrKEgaQ/1eql-TXbT_cJ

Stephen Paul was the first person I ran across who had what I consider "amazing" sounds from an MP3  (as I point out in the linked post above), and this was over 15 years ago.

> As a result, it's
> very important for me to use the best codec if I am compressing. Right
> now, it seems to be WMA Pro at 320kbps in VBR. Of course, I much prefer
> the sound of a FLAC file but the storage required for that is insane.

It is right now but as storage becomes bigger/less expensive, people will be able to enjoy portable, high quality audio that is much closer to what was intended. 

Unfortunately, Comcast killed off personal web pages so I no longer can upload to the location that file was previously housed at and I couldn't find a local copy of it so, unless someone made one (or I have it but just haven't found it yet) it's disappeared into the electronosphere.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328861

FromBig Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com>
Date2015-10-27 13:05 -0400
Message-ID<l457x1hxgu35.2mb356y60en5$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#328854
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT), Steve Carroll wrote:

> On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 9:57:18 AM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote: 
> 
> (snip) 
> 
>> I'm one of the few people who can hear the difference between a file
>> compressed at 192kbps and one compressed at 320kbps.
> 
> LOL! No dude, sorry... I've proven this isn't always the case when I
> pointed to that audio file of me on guitar, which wasn't a recorded
> audio sound coming *from* the guitar that I played it on.  This was a
> patch from a Logic plugin that was triggered by one of my Godin's
> (LGX-SA). 
> 
> You: "The guitar sounds amazing. Is that a 320kbps MP3 encoded with
> LAME?" 
> 
> As the response shows, it was 160kbps. 
> 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/imu2wrKEgaQ/1eql-TXbT_cJ
> 
> 
> Stephen Paul was the first person I ran across who had what I consider
> "amazing" sounds from an MP3  (as I point out in the linked post above),
> and this was over 15 years ago. 
> 
>> As a result, it's very important for me to use the best codec if I am
>> compressing. Right now, it seems to be WMA Pro at 320kbps in VBR. Of
>> course, I much prefer the sound of a FLAC file but the storage required
>> for that is insane.
> 
> It is right now but as storage becomes bigger/less expensive, people
> will be able to enjoy portable, high quality audio that is much closer
> to what was intended. 
> 
> Unfortunately, Comcast killed off personal web pages so I no longer can
> upload to the location that file was previously housed at and I couldn't
> find a local copy of it so, unless someone made one (or I have it but
> just haven't found it yet) it's disappeared into the electronosphere.

Buy a SanDisk Clip Sport add a 65G MicroSD card and you'll be able to take
more music with you than you could ever need.
It also supports most of the popular formats including flac.

Also you don't have to deal with bloated iTunes at all.
Drag and drop music or playlists, etc to the player and it's done.

http://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/14130/~/sandisk-clip-sport%2Fjam-supported-file-types


-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328875

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-27 13:43 -0400
Message-ID<n0ocvq$ger$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328854
On 2015-10-27 12:50 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 9:57:18 AM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
> 
> (snip)
> 
>> I'm one of the few people who can hear the difference between a file
>> compressed at 192kbps and one compressed at 320kbps.
> 
> LOL! No dude, sorry... I've proven this isn't always the case when I pointed to that audio file of me on guitar, which wasn't a recorded audio sound coming *from* the guitar that I played it on.  This was a patch from a Logic plugin that was triggered by one of my Godin's (LGX-SA). 
> 
> You: "The guitar sounds amazing. Is that a 320kbps MP3 encoded with LAME?"
> 
> As the response shows, it was 160kbps. 
> 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/imu2wrKEgaQ/1eql-TXbT_cJ
> 
> Stephen Paul was the first person I ran across who had what I consider "amazing" sounds from an MP3  (as I point out in the linked post above), and this was over 15 years ago.

Not all digital music files will sound different between 160kbps and
320kbps but it all depends which song you're talking about. In my case,
I can differentiate between an MP3 at 320kbps and a WMA Pro file from
the way guitars sound. Between a 320kbps and 160kbps music file, I will
spot difference in the way the compression handles two or more
instruments playing simultaneously. I've done this often enough to
conclude that WMA Pro is what I want my music encoded to if I absolutely
require compression.

>> As a result, it's
>> very important for me to use the best codec if I am compressing. Right
>> now, it seems to be WMA Pro at 320kbps in VBR. Of course, I much prefer
>> the sound of a FLAC file but the storage required for that is insane.
> 
> It is right now but as storage becomes bigger/less expensive, people will be able to enjoy portable, high quality audio that is much closer to what was intended. 
> 
> Unfortunately, Comcast killed off personal web pages so I no longer can upload to the location that file was previously housed at and I couldn't find a local copy of it so, unless someone made one (or I have it but just haven't found it yet) it's disappeared into the electronosphere.

It doesn't matter. I know what I hear but I believe you. 160kbps and
320kbps is indeed indistinguishable in certain contexts.

-- 
Charmed Tuna

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328856

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-27 11:30 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn2v9lt.vg4.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#328845
On 2015-10-27, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
> On 2015-10-27 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>>> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>> On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
>>>>> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
>>>>>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
>>>>>>

[deletia]

>>>>    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
>>>> available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
>>>> would have at least held my entire collection.
>>>>
>>>>    It ran Linux.
>>>>
>>>>    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
>>>> the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
>>>
>>> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 
>> 
>> Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.
>
> No people expect a portable player to sound right which is why people

...again, you are attributing far too much "geekiness" to the common man.

[deletia]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328864

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-27 10:20 -0700
Message-ID<eb5cde5e-89cc-4c05-80f2-88eb9872d58a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328856
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 11:00:09 AM UTC-6, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2015-10-27, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
> > On 2015-10-27 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
> >>> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >>>> On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
> >>>>> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
> >>>>>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
> >>>>>>
> 
> [deletia]
> 
> >>>>    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
> >>>> available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
> >>>> would have at least held my entire collection.
> >>>>
> >>>>    It ran Linux.
> >>>>
> >>>>    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
> >>>> the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
> >>>
> >>> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 
> >> 
> >> Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.
> >
> > No people expect a portable player to sound right which is why people
> 
> ...again, you are attributing far too much "geekiness" to the common man.

Geekiness has nothing to do with it. The common man can still hear, JED. The problem is that most people don't know *what* to listen for; often, once you show them, they're hooked. The question then is: Are they prepared to spend the additional (often prohibitive) amount of money it takes? 

If the concept of "wasn't good enough" is the topic (which you brought) and you're trying to isolate Apple from a pack of products that weren't "good enough" anyway (due to tech limitations and price), then what, exactly, was your point here if not just to piss in the Apple punch bowl? Put another way, sound aside (because they *all* sucked back then) what portable MP3 player was "good enough" for you when the iPod came out?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328877

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-27 13:45 -0400
Message-ID<n0od3u$ger$8@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328864
On 2015-10-27 1:20 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 11:00:09 AM UTC-6, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> On 2015-10-27, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
>>> On 2015-10-27 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>>>>> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>>>> On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
>>>>>>>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
>>>>>>>>
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>>>>>>    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
>>>>>> available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
>>>>>> would have at least held my entire collection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    It ran Linux.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
>>>>>> the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 
>>>>
>>>> Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.
>>>
>>> No people expect a portable player to sound right which is why people
>>
>> ...again, you are attributing far too much "geekiness" to the common man.
> 
> Geekiness has nothing to do with it. The common man can still hear, JED. The problem is that most people don't know *what* to listen for; often, once you show them, they're hooked. The question then is: Are they prepared to spend the additional (often prohibitive) amount of money it takes? 
> 
> If the concept of "wasn't good enough" is the topic (which you brought) and you're trying to isolate Apple from a pack of products that weren't "good enough" anyway (due to tech limitations and price), then what, exactly, was your point here if not just to piss in the Apple punch bowl? Put another way, sound aside (because they *all* sucked back then) what portable MP3 player was "good enough" for you when the iPod came out?

You're asking JEDIDIAH for concrete examples. We both know he won't
provide any.


-- 
Charmed Tuna

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328898

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-27 13:43 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn2vhdt.n23.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#328864
On 2015-10-27, Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 11:00:09 AM UTC-6, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> On 2015-10-27, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
>> > On 2015-10-27 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>> >> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
>> >>> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> >>>> On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
>> >>>>> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
>> >>>>>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
>> >>>>>>
>> 
>> [deletia]
>> 
>> >>>>    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
>> >>>> available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
>> >>>> would have at least held my entire collection.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>    It ran Linux.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
>> >>>> the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
>> >>>
>> >>> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 
>> >> 
>> >> Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.
>> >
>> > No people expect a portable player to sound right which is why people
>> 
>> ...again, you are attributing far too much "geekiness" to the common man.
>
> Geekiness has nothing to do with it. The common man can still hear, JED. The 

   Ok then... "discrimination"

> problem is that most people don't know *what* to listen for; often, once you 

   Nor do they care.

> show them, they're hooked. The question then is: Are they prepared to spend 
> the additional (often prohibitive) amount of money it takes? 

   ...an even bigger barrier. People are cheapskates.

>
> If the concept of "wasn't good enough" is the topic (which you brought) and you're trying to isolate Apple from a pack of products that weren't "good enough" anyway (due to tech limitations and price), then what, exactly, was your point here if not just to piss in the Apple punch bowl? Put another way, sound aside (because they *all* sucked back then) what portable MP3 player was "good enough" for you when the iPod came out?

    This is about "sounding right". No one ever really cared about these devices
"sounding right". That's not what devices like these are sold for. It doesn't
matter if it's MP3 players or what preceded them.

    It's just a totally bogus argument.

    It doesn't matter what device(s) I pined for at the time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328903

FromSteve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-27 12:21 -0700
Message-ID<d6e25c2a-6087-4860-ba0d-efdb2b98e9ad@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328898
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 1:00:09 PM UTC-6, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2015-10-27, Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 11:00:09 AM UTC-6, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >> On 2015-10-27, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
> >> > On 2015-10-27 11:09 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> >> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 5:03:29 PM UTC-6, Charmed Tuna wrote:
> >> >>> On 2015-10-26 5:49 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >> >>>> On 2015-10-26, Charmed Tuna <> wrote:
> >> >>>>> On 2015-10-26 8:03 AM, cc wrote:
> >> >>>>>> http://jezebel.com/the-best-comments-from-the-day-the-ipod-was-released-1-1738605065
> >> >>>>>>
> >> 
> >> [deletia]
> >> 
> >> >>>>    I wanted a better alternative at the time. Fortunately such a thing was 
> >> >>>> available. Unfortunately it was a little too costly for my tastes. But it 
> >> >>>> would have at least held my entire collection.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>    It ran Linux.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>    My music collection was already all MP3 by the time the iPod came out and
> >> >>>> the iPod just wasn't good enough for me.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Just about everyone wanted an iPod and whoever got one, loved it. 
> >> >> 
> >> >> Which is weird as hell to me. I still have a couple of early models (I think one of them is the first model they made) they sounded, and still sound, like sh*t because of the crap converter.
> >> >
> >> > No people expect a portable player to sound right which is why people
> >> 
> >> ...again, you are attributing far too much "geekiness" to the common man.
> >
> > Geekiness has nothing to do with it. The common man can still hear, JED. The 
> 
>    Ok then... "discrimination"

LOL!  In this case I'd say 'discriminate' is a better term. That's what the topic regularly boils down to here on COLA, isn't it (in some form or other)?

> > problem is that most people don't know *what* to listen for; often, once you 
> 
>    Nor do they care.

Probably not most, but some definitely do.

> > show them, they're hooked. The question then is: Are they prepared to spend 
> > the additional (often prohibitive) amount of money it takes? 
> 
>    ...an even bigger barrier. People are cheapskates.
> 

I won't go there but I'll agree that most people may not "care" enough to pony up the extra $$. With the cost of everything nowadays, can't say I blame them, especially if they're raising a family. 


> > If the concept of "wasn't good enough" is the topic (which you brought) and you're trying to isolate Apple from a pack of products that weren't "good enough" anyway (due to tech limitations and price), then what, exactly, was your point here if not just to piss in the Apple punch bowl? Put another way, sound aside (because they *all* sucked back then) what portable MP3 player was "good enough" for you when the iPod came out?
> 
>     This is about "sounding right". No one ever really cared about these devices
> "sounding right". That's not what devices like these are sold for. 

Of course not, JED, they're sold to "sound wrong", we all know that <eyeroll>. Zip up now.

> It doesn't
> matter if it's MP3 players or what preceded them.
> 
>     It's just a totally bogus argument.
> 
>     It doesn't matter what device(s) I pined for at the time.

Yeah... it smelled like punch bowl pissing again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328904

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-27 14:21 -0500
Message-ID<79jv2b1tinhrks7jov2flavrfr3sthkngu@4ax.com>
In reply to#328898
JEDIDIAH wrote:

>This is about "sounding right". No one ever really cared about these devices
>"sounding right". That's not what devices like these are sold for. It doesn't
>matter if it's MP3 players or what preceded them.

I can't agree with you there, Jed.  Sound quality is still a worthy
design goal, and some of us do appreciate is.

Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
locking-lock competition.  Please, no!

Thank goodness Bluetooth interfaces now obviate such shite.

Remember when "Ezekiel" claimed that Linux can't be "ready for the
desktop" if it doesn't work with the iPod?  What a fsckwit!

-- 
"You can't have it both ways.... you can't argue one day that "Linux
is ready for the desktop" and then the next day completely ignore that
the most  popular consumer gadget on the planet doesn't work on
Linux."  -  trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328923

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-27 15:12 -0500
Message-ID<iamv2bho1qnavpbga33h9qmk43rqhqh43h@4ax.com>
In reply to#328904
chrisv wrote:

>I can't agree with you there, Jed.  Sound quality is still a worthy
>design goal, and some of us do appreciate is.
>
>Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
>to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
>I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
>locking-lock competition.  Please, no!

Making a lot of typos, today.  I woke-up early, and, rather than waste
the time, went for a run, which is difficult.  I'm tired.

Simpsons's "Treehouse of Horror" marathon continues tonight on FXX!

-- 
"Linux is a complete copycat OS."  -  trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328934

From-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Date2015-10-27 13:38 -0700
Message-ID<140dbfa3-b19a-4c4e-8c8a-5dad0ebdc3f0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#328904
chrisv wrote:
> 
> Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
> to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
> I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
> locking-lock competition.  Please, no!

Except that the facts are that iPod had a ~75% market share and was 
indeed a "de facto standard" for which the general public's consumer
expectations did indeed expect compatibility ... and many OEM's
did so, so as to avoid being left at a competitive disadvantage:

"Since October 2004, the iPod line has dominated digital music player sales in the United States, with over 90% of the market for hard drive-based players and over 70% of the market for all types of players.[78] During the year from January 2004 to January 2005, the high rate of sales caused its U.S. market share to increase from 31% to 65% and in July 2005, this market share was measured at 74%...."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod#Sales>

Perhaps chrisv can explain why it would be so "wrong" apparently, 
for customer expectations to be that mainstream products be supported.  
 

> Thank goodness Bluetooth interfaces now obviate such shite.


Well, well:  chrisv **finally** sees wireless as a good thing, but 
it is funny how that is a reversal for chrisv from a few years ago, 
when the lack of a hardwired USB port was such a profound issue for
him, even though wireless (both 802 and BT) were specifically pointed
out as to where the hockey puck was heading:

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/P9TJ5re95o4J>

 
> Remember when "Ezekiel" claimed that Linux can't be "ready for the
> desktop" if it doesn't work with the iPod?  What a fsckwit!

Remember when chrisv said this?

"God forbid they [Apple] simply add an inexpensive USB interface
[to the iPad], which would allow the connection of an order-of-
magnitude more devices..."

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/5KN8i0TG4jcJ>

And this?

"However, that doesn't change my opinion that the exclusion 
of things like USB ports and SD-card slots from the iPad are 
poor design decisions, made to make Apple more money, not to 
make the product a better value for customers."

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/dNNm9S0HeXoJ>


And remember when chrisv ran away from how it was pointed out that
his argument was self-contradicting on the notion of 'Apple Greed'? 

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/HSUzAm3AbVEJ>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329130

From"Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com>
Date2015-10-28 10:33 -0400
Message-ID<n0qm88$d3p$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328934
>
>"-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in message 
>news:140dbfa3-b19a-4c4e-8c8a-5dad0ebdc3f0@googlegroups.com...
>chrisv wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
>> to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
>> I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
>> locking-lock competition.  Please, no!
>
>Except that the facts are that iPod had a ~75% market share and was
>indeed a "de facto standard" for which the general public's consumer
>expectations did indeed expect compatibility ... and many OEM's
>did so, so as to avoid being left at a competitive disadvantage:
>
>"Since October 2004, the iPod line has dominated digital music player sales 
>in the United States, with over 90% of the market for hard drive-based 
>players and over 70% of the market for all types of players.[78] During the 
>year from January 2004 to January 2005, the high rate of sales caused its 
>U.S. market share to increase from 31% to 65% and in July 2005, this market 
>share was measured at 74%...."
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod#Sales>
>
>Perhaps chrisv can explain why it would be so "wrong" apparently,
>for customer expectations to be that mainstream products be supported.
>
>
>> Thank goodness Bluetooth interfaces now obviate such shite.
>
>
>Well, well:  chrisv **finally** sees wireless as a good thing, but
>it is funny how that is a reversal for chrisv from a few years ago,
>when the lack of a hardwired USB port was such a profound issue for
>him, even though wireless (both 802 and BT) were specifically pointed
>out as to where the hockey puck was heading:
>
><https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/P9TJ5re95o4J>
>
>
>> Remember when "Ezekiel" claimed that Linux can't be "ready for the
>> desktop" if it doesn't work with the iPod?  What a fsckwit!
>
>Remember when chrisv said this?
>
>"God forbid they [Apple] simply add an inexpensive USB interface
>[to the iPad], which would allow the connection of an order-of-
>magnitude more devices..."
>
><https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/5KN8i0TG4jcJ>
>
>And this?
>
>"However, that doesn't change my opinion that the exclusion
>of things like USB ports and SD-card slots from the iPad are
>poor design decisions, made to make Apple more money, not to
>make the product a better value for customers."
>
><https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/dNNm9S0HeXoJ>
>
>
>And remember when chrisv ran away from how it was pointed out that
>his argument was self-contradicting on the notion of 'Apple Greed'?
>
><https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.linux.advocacy/Jdqk7j3aDFo/HSUzAm3AbVEJ>
>
>

That thread ("No USB ports on iPad") is hilarious when you go back and read 
it now. Pretty much every "advocate" who posted in that thread was an expert 
on what Apple /should/ have done and was sure that the lack of USB ports was 
going to be such a big negative.  How'd that work out in reality?

They even listed specific reasons why the lack of USB ports was going to be 
so limiting. People wouldn't be able to print. (Even though wireless 
printing was around long before then.) People wouldn't be able to plug in an 
external CD-Rom and burn a CD. (My desktop/laptop have an internal CD burner 
that haven't been used since 2008). All these sacrifices that consumers have 
to put up with because there's no USB port.

Oddly enough in the real world I have yet to see anyone care about USB ports 
on the iPad. The only ones who cared were the "advocates" who knew what the 
iPad really needed... and that's a USB port.

-- 
"M$ Windows is also why computers have a soft-reset button. Apparently Macs 
have them too."

Dumb Willy Poaster
April 8, 2015
<6vefvb-4bf.ln1@user-1842.linux.individual.net>


    The Atari 520ST (1985) rear panel. Left to right:
    RESET switch, Power switch....
    http://classiccmp.org/dunfield/atarist/index.htm


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#328941

FromCharmed Tuna <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-10-27 17:22 -0400
Message-ID<n0opqd$6k7$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#328904
On 2015-10-27 3:21 PM, chrisv wrote:
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
> 
>> This is about "sounding right". No one ever really cared about these devices
>> "sounding right". That's not what devices like these are sold for. It doesn't
>> matter if it's MP3 players or what preceded them.
> 
> I can't agree with you there, Jed.  Sound quality is still a worthy
> design goal, and some of us do appreciate is.
> 
> Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
> to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
> I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
> locking-lock competition.  Please, no!

I hate it too so I know exactly what you're referring to. Buy an iPhone
and every manufacturer produces accessories for you. Even car
manufacturers cater to Apple's products. Buy something you consider to
be better and you're out of luck.

> Thank goodness Bluetooth interfaces now obviate such shite.

Agreed.

< snip >


-- 
Charmed Tuna

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329169

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-28 11:01 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn31sb0.ed1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#328904
On 2015-10-27, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
>>This is about "sounding right". No one ever really cared about these devices
>>"sounding right". That's not what devices like these are sold for. It doesn't
>>matter if it's MP3 players or what preceded them.
>
> I can't agree with you there, Jed.  Sound quality is still a worthy
> design goal, and some of us do appreciate is.

...about as many of us that value stability and security.

   I dispute the idea that the iPod had better sound quality or that it had
anything to do with Apple market share.

>
> Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
> to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
> I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
> locking-lock competition.  Please, no!
>
> Thank goodness Bluetooth interfaces now obviate such shite.

   Modern head units take it one step farther. They just accept USB
storage devices. 

>
> Remember when "Ezekiel" claimed that Linux can't be "ready for the
> desktop" if it doesn't work with the iPod?  What a fsckwit!
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329186

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-28 11:39 -0500
Message-ID<5rt13bdibvsl1dcjaofa54p355qco75bfh@4ax.com>
In reply to#329169
JEDIDIAH wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, I have zero problem with iPods per see, but it was sickening
>> to see, for a time, the "de facto standard" bullshit rising again.
>> I'm talking about docking stations, and cars, with iPod interfaces,
>> locking-lock competition.  Please, no!
>>
>> Thank goodness Bluetooth interfaces now obviate such shite.
>
>   Modern head units take it one step farther. They just accept USB
>storage devices. 

For healthy competition and consumer choice, it's important that it's
a generic interface, open to all competitors.

But, when connecting cars to phones or to media players, I don't think
that you get the same integration of car and device, as you do when
you connect them using Bluetooth (or when using a Apple's proprietary
interface).

Correct me if I'm wrong.  I own a modern car that can do all that
stuff, but my phone is ancient.

-- 
'Find this mythological "free market".'  -  some piece of shit that
calls itself "GreyCloud"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329188

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-10-28 11:45 -0500
Message-ID<aqu13btj90r54ptli370fjc7f1c031inf1@4ax.com>
In reply to#329186
chrisv wrote:

>But, when connecting cars to phones or to media players

 (with  USB),

>I don't think
>that you get the same integration of car and device, as you do when
>you connect them using Bluetooth (or when using a Apple's proprietary
>interface).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329193

FromBig Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com>
Date2015-10-28 12:48 -0400
Message-ID<s16lrhqmtgq5$.pzzetvb8mv2s.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#329188
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:45:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
> 
>>But, when connecting cars to phones or to media players
> 
>  (with  USB),
> 
>>I don't think
>>that you get the same integration of car and device, as you do when
>>you connect them using Bluetooth (or when using a Apple's proprietary
>>interface).

You don't but since Linux users accept the lowest level of fetaures and
performance, it shouldn't matter.

Just one example. There are many more.

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_130X2700BS/Pioneer-AVH-X2700BS.html


" Plus, with your compatible iPhone® you can take advantage of Siri Eyes
Free functionality, using your voice to to place calls, select music, hear
notifications, add reminders — even compose and listen to text messages."

 

-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329214

FromJEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet>
Date2015-10-28 12:12 -0500
Message-ID<slrnn320f2.ed1.jedi@nomad.mishnet>
In reply to#329193
On 2015-10-28, Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:45:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote:
>> 
>>>But, when connecting cars to phones or to media players
>> 
>>  (with  USB),
>> 
>>>I don't think
>>>that you get the same integration of car and device, as you do when
>>>you connect them using Bluetooth (or when using a Apple's proprietary
>>>interface).
>
> You don't but since Linux users accept the lowest level of fetaures and
> performance, it shouldn't matter.
>
> Just one example. There are many more.
>
> http://www.crutchfield.com/p_130X2700BS/Pioneer-AVH-X2700BS.html
>
>
> " Plus, with your compatible iPhone® you can take advantage of Siri Eyes
> Free functionality, using your voice to to place calls, select music, hear
> notifications, add reminders — even compose and listen to text messages."

   That is actually more about using the phone directly you dufus.

   That's like bragging you can pick up the phone and use the touch screen.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329229

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-28 17:55 +0000
Message-ID<d9cgguFpcgnU6@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#329214
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:12:02 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2015-10-28, Big Fish in a Small Crotch
> <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:45:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>> 
>>>>But, when connecting cars to phones or to media players
>>> 
>>>  (with  USB),
>>> 
>>>>I don't think that you get the same integration of car and device, as
>>>>you do when you connect them using Bluetooth (or when using a Apple's
>>>>proprietary interface).
>>
>> You don't but since Linux users accept the lowest level of fetaures and
>> performance, it shouldn't matter.
>>
>> Just one example. There are many more.
>>
>> http://www.crutchfield.com/p_130X2700BS/Pioneer-AVH-X2700BS.html
>>
>>
>> " Plus, with your compatible iPhone® you can take advantage of Siri
>> Eyes Free functionality, using your voice to to place calls, select
>> music, hear notifications, add reminders — even compose and listen to
>> text messages."
> 
>    That is actually more about using the phone directly you dufus.
> 
>    That's like bragging you can pick up the phone and use the touch
>    screen.

But in cars equipped for it, you can use it while driving.  Quite slick 
and handy.





-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#329235

FromBig Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com>
Date2015-10-28 14:22 -0400
Message-ID<r12y1vhyjgbz.ttpxc2tj2sv9$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#329229
On 28 Oct 2015 17:55:42 GMT, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:12:02 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-10-28, Big Fish in a Small Crotch
>> <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:45:01 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>But, when connecting cars to phones or to media players
>>>> 
>>>>  (with  USB),
>>>> 
>>>>>I don't think that you get the same integration of car and device, as
>>>>>you do when you connect them using Bluetooth (or when using a Apple's
>>>>>proprietary interface).
>>>
>>> You don't but since Linux users accept the lowest level of fetaures and
>>> performance, it shouldn't matter.
>>>
>>> Just one example. There are many more.
>>>
>>> http://www.crutchfield.com/p_130X2700BS/Pioneer-AVH-X2700BS.html
>>>
>>>
>>> " Plus, with your compatible iPhone® you can take advantage of Siri
>>> Eyes Free functionality, using your voice to to place calls, select
>>> music, hear notifications, add reminders — even compose and listen to
>>> text messages."
>> 
>>    That is actually more about using the phone directly you dufus.
>> 
>>    That's like bragging you can pick up the phone and use the touch
>>    screen.
> 
> But in cars equipped for it, you can use it while driving.  Quite slick 
> and handy.

Idiot Jed is scrambling around in circles once again.
You'll never convince a zealot like him to realize that some really nice
technology, like hands free texting for example, exists . No need to touch
anything. And most of that is compatible with the iPhone although Android
is gaining some support.

He probably uses one of those cassette adapter things that plugs into the
headphone jack on the phone and he's happy.
Some people are.
Linux people in particular.
Their standards are so low they don't even realize what else is out there.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/91WBmv1GAcL._SL1500_.jpg




-- 
You Ain't The Biggest Fish In The Crotch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 6 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy


csiph-web