Paul Irvine wrote:
>
> #1 - Everyone keeps trying to defend the sound quality while the popularity
> of mp3 clearly demonstrates that it's not an issue.
Agreed. It is not the reason MD is not selling in huge numbers.
> #2 - Portability, robustness, editing capabilities and size are the main
> points with sound quality that I can't tell from cd, nor would I care to
> descern. Not to insult the audiofiles because I have my own passions and
> would never demean the passions of another.
True. I don't think portability is that big of an issue either. I've
seen lots of people carrying portable CD players in the palm of their
hand and they don't seem to mind having to carry that big bulky thing.
When I used to listen to my MD portable at the university, I dropped it
into a pocket. Out of my way, I could hardly even feel it. Strange
that most people don't mind the bulky CD player, but it's not as though
they haven't heard of MD. I noticed that most people actually know that
MD exists, they just don't really care I guess.
> #3 - Copy the cd cover, reduce it to 2.5" vertical and print it out on an
> inkjet on photo paper. Then stick it to the inside of the md case and don't
> it look like the coolest thing?
Certainly!
> #4 - Price: The cost plus the fact that the format requires you to invest in
> a recorder as well as any players you might want. This is because the music
> industry for some reason decided not to support it with pre-recorded
> selections. Probably because the things cost so much that they knew
> everybody would be too cheap to buy them.
Exactly. MD is not selling big, because there are no prerecorded
selections. I can't even count the number of times people have asked me
where they can find prerecorded MDs. Best Buy doesn't even have them
any more. There was not much demand for prerecorded MDs anyway though,
because MD equipment cost so much more than play-only CD equipment that
not that many people were buying it.
Those crappy little MP3 players are selling big (they are EVERYWHERE
now) because people like the idea of FREE music. With software like
Napster, people can get the music they want, anytime, anywhere. It's
super fast with a cable modem, although many people are satisified to
wait 20-30 minutes with a 33.6 modem just so they don't have to pay
anything. That's why I think Sony should have jumped on MP3 integration
with MD. Copying CD to MD is what many people do, but everyone I know
uses CD-R instead. They feel if you're just going to do a direct copy,
CD-R is easier and faster than realtime recording. However, with MP3,
you have to download a track at a time. For that, MD is much more
convenient, no need to close a session, and you can record the tracks
one at a time. Sometimes people download stuff they've never even heard
of just to see what it's like. With MD, it's easy to delete that
track. I know there's a new R55 out that has a USB connector of some
sort, but can it record an MP3 in FASTER than realtime? I think that's
what Sony should strive for. A portable with USB that can download the
MP3 from the USB port faster than realtime. If it could download as
fast as those silly MP3 players, which do you think people would buy?
Flash memory is pretty expensive. I haven't kept up on current prices,
but assuming a 32MB is around $50-60, that's only around 32 minutes of
stereo MP3. MD holds 74-80 minutes, and the MD blanks are usually $2 or
so.
> Well, I use md, enjoy it and have enough recorded discs full of crap that I
> could probably get by for about 6 Puscarian years on my own should the
> bottom drop out of the whole thing.
Same here!
--
Shawn Lin
http://www2.cybercities.com/g/gmwbodycars/
_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
