Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:56, Stefan Schreiber <st...@mail.telepac.pt> wrote:
Oh yes, go to Apple and look if they listen to your ideas, and let others do their stuff instead of doing
some promotion for some "stylish", "fahionable" campany offering "super slim"
products.
You make my point: they won't listen, at least not at this point in the game.
But that's exactly why it's futile to advocate lab type stuff, and stick with what's available to the mass market now.
The mass market right now offers exactly two things:
a) stereo audio
b) custom apps though the various app stores.
And that means that any mass market solution must at this point be stereo
compatible and may employ a custom playback app made available through the
various app store channels.
(Samsung and Amazon sell also a lot of smartphones and tablets, by the way. If
it i just about numbers, Samsungs sells actually more mobile phones...)
I use Apple as an example, because it's the dominant company in this field,
while the rest are imitators and followers; not leaders. Who sells more devices
also doesn't matter, what matters which devices are used. And if you e.g. look
at the web traffic statistics you'll see how clearly Apple dominates that
field. Apple is also the company with the bargaining power. So if they see
surround as the future, they can make that future happen. Therefore, getting
surround sound into their platform by means of a Trojan horse (like e.g.
putting UHJ-encoded material into the iTunes store) is a start on that path.
I am really angry about these postings. Look for surround in your local Apple store, and
if you find somen give us some news about. Otherwise, Apple and their
"fashionable" products are offtopic. (I don't see any relationship to this
thread, and even not to this audio list.)
You're angry at reality. I'm not making these things up, nor do they constitute
my ideal world. But I'm willing to face the reality and ask which small steps
can we take to get from here to there by infiltrating what actual consumers
use, rather than being preoccupied with lab experiments and boutique recordings
that cater to a bunch of enthusiasts.
Nobody who matters (i.e. average consumer) is interested in a dorky
head-tracking headphone setup that makes him/her look like a Borg from Star
Trek.
I think this is just half-educated. Wasn't the success of the Wii
console based on some gyroscope/motion sensors, which are build in into
the remote controller?
Don't have even many mobile phones and laptops motion controllers?
Headphones are accessories that need to be fashionable, because people know they are
going to be seen in public wearing them. That's reality. Get used to it. That's why stuff
like Beats by Dr. Dre sells ("cool DJs have them") and nobody would want to be
caught dead wearing top-notch studio head phones.
Ronald
Thanks for the education! :-D
Bayer and Sennheiser still sell more stuff than Dr. Dre. You are welcome
to buy fashionble products by Dr. Dre, Apfel, or whoever is currently in
fashion.
Don't hold your breath for a fashionable Apple TV, though. (I mean the
iTV, BTW. Apple didn't figure out yet what this actually is all
about... :-X )
Best,
Stefan
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
