 |
|  |
 |
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999 time: 22:31
|
|
Just out of curiousity, Drake...how can you have the balls to criticize me when it's you that clearly have problems with this debate.
Like, for example, in this iTunes thread, where we're arguing specifically about Apple not letting other people play iTMS-downloaded songs, you just now claim that you weren't talking about that all along -- but the "vanilla AAC" that Apple doesn't even frickin' use.
Just what the hell are you doing, aside from running around in circles like a chicken with its head cut off?
Edit: And what's the point in saying MPEG4-AAC is a standard anyway, when what Apple uses is obviously not a standard? Was this an intentional way for you to mislead people into thinking Apple's AAC-derived format is a standard, or were you just ignorant then and denying it now?
Last edited by Asher on 20-10-2003 at 11:00
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999 time: 22:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I have no problem with that, since you argue in a reasonable fashion. My beef with Asher isn't his views, but the way he goes about airing them. |
You have a beef with me because you have the debating skills of a mentally-handicapped llama.
I argue in a reasonable fashion, too, full of logic, reasoning, and links to facts. As I recall, it's Agathon that puts people on ignore that he debates with and you that calls the other person a liar incessantly.
I don't call either of those reasonable, at least I debate the topic at hand. 
I'm confrontational in my debates. I won't sit around sipping tea and politely nodding my head when somebody goes on and on about how Blue and Red are the same colors, I'll tell them that Blue and Red are certainly distinct colors, damnit. Some people can't handle that, apparently. They'd prefer somebody coddle them.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999 time: 22:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Agathon
And I've found links saying that AAC is an open standard. This is a purely semantic debate, which is what Drake was saying.
You lose. |
Q Cubed was saying it was a semantic debate, Drake was saying it's an open standard because people can see how it works by looking at the ISO papers.
Not to mention that I'm sure you can find links saying AAC is an open standard, you can also find links saying the holocaust never happened.
AAC is not an open standard, because open standard means you can use the standard without being charged for it. Being able to see how it works does not make it an open standard, because you cannot use any of that information unless you pay for a license. This is, by definition, a proprietary system since it is both copyrighted and licensable material. In order for something to be open, it must be possible to legally use it and modify it without paying and without legal reprecussions (ie, open source).
In no way, shape, or form is AAC an open standard.
Furthermore, this whole debate is meaningless because Apple doesn't use the MPEG4-AAC ISO standard, they use their own proprietary mix with Fairplay.
Which means the Mac side has been deliberatly trying to mislead people, by saying iTunes uses AAC and AAC is an open standard, while evil MS uses its proprietary WMA. 
You both lose, and you get additional deductions for your last minute weasle-attempt.
BTW, so much for ignoring me. I knew you read the posts. 
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31. Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|