Brian Atkins wrote:
> My take is:
> a) why blow more $$$ for hard drives or cd-r media when you've
> already got the bits in digital format on the original cds.
> b) whether you copy the media or not, why do you still want
> to be stuck carting it around with you around the planet- even
> if you reduce the amount of atoms required by converting to
> mp3, you still are going to be lugging extra junk around with
> Need to stop carting atoms around!
sure, but you could do the same with files like mp3 or vqf (better quality, compression ratio) or what standard you want.. it's better to be independent of the support... to deal with cd audio where the music is relatively badly encoded (too much space needed) is far more expensive. Think to all the hardware and mechanics needed for a simple jukebox... waste of material and money. Think that a CDR full of vqf can have something like 14 cd audio compressed in it... for the quality, i confess i'm totally unable to make a difference, so that's good for me. You will probably have to encode your cds in the future anyway... And you don't need to take mp3 with you... you could more easily transfer these files from a server anywhere in the world and with far less bandwidth. For me it's more convenient, confortable, more easy and secure, to have all my cd collection on hard drives... no need to expensive mechanical systems with probably a bad mtbf.
Of course i would like to have a small personal assistant with GSM capabilities connected permanently to the Internet and with the bandwidth needed to be able to receive high quality music, HDTV, film on demand, mails, Internet, books, video games, windows98 compatible/ java (or another system), with an interface somewhat like the glasstron of sony, with 3d capabilities, enhanced reality, capability to analyze the environment and a huge working memory. If i can interface it directly into my brain, i will be even more happy ;)