Another reason to not play DRM'ed songs on the go

communist · 18th March 2006, 23:04

Turns out decoding DRM'ed songs drains the battery of mp3-players by up to 25%

But is it really so much of surprise considering the tracks are 'heavily' encrypted?! Good I didn buy any DRM-'encumbered' song / player nor will I *ever*.

So much for "Plays for shorter"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03...s_for_shorter/
http://www.mp3.com/stories/3646.html...&ref_type_id=8

celtic_druid · 19th March 2006, 04:07

Why are they comparing DRM'ed WMA files to mp3's and not non DRM'ed WMA files?

Revgen · 19th March 2006, 07:54

The issue is that people shouldn't have to keep recharging their batteries to play music that has DRM when non-DRM .mp3 files won't tax their players.

foxyshadis · 19th March 2006, 08:02

AAC, WMA, and vorbis all require a lot more horsepower (and thus battery life) to decode, whether drm'd or not. Such is the downside of getting a lot more for your megs. I haven't cared about mp3 in 4 years, so I'd only be interested in a Fairplay vs plain AAC comparison, or c_d's suggestion.

unmei · 19th March 2006, 11:07

yes from my experience vorbis could cost about 15% compared to mp3 on my (harddrive based!) iRiver, with no DRM involved at all.. A comparision between DRMed wma and mp3 really doesn't hold much value like that. It's a bit unfortunate because i think the point they want to make can most likely be made with a valid comparision (decoding DRM simply cannot be for free).

Doom9 · 19th March 2006, 12:32

I considered putting this in the news but at the end of the day, you'd have to exclude the decoding overhead of WMA and AAC versus MP3 to have a fair comparison.. without doing so, you have a void conclusion.

shevegen · 19th March 2006, 15:34

Problem is, in the end, you as customer (all customers with ipod + DRM for example) will pay the bills for recharging. The question is why to support with your money, laws that f*** you?

From the perspective of a CEO, this is great. Buy shares of other companies, like energy giants. They will love it too, especially if more electronic devices demand more and more energy...

celtic_druid · 19th March 2006, 15:38

Well my iPod lives in my car so essentially it is petrol powered.

18th March 2006, 23:04	#1 \| Link
communist Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1,152	Another reason to not play DRM'ed songs on the go Turns out decoding DRM'ed songs drains the battery of mp3-players by up to 25% But is it really so much of surprise considering the tracks are 'heavily' encrypted?! Good I didn buy any DRM-'encumbered' song / player nor will I ever. So much for "Plays for shorter" http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03...s_for_shorter/ http://www.mp3.com/stories/3646.html...&ref_type_id=8

19th March 2006, 07:54	#3 \| Link
Revgen Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Near LA, California, USA Posts: 1,545	The issue is that people shouldn't have to keep recharging their batteries to play music that has DRM when non-DRM .mp3 files won't tax their players. __________________ Pirate: Now how would you like to die? Would you like to have your head chopped off or be burned at the stake? Curly: Burned at the stake! Moe: Why? Curly: A hot steak is always better than a cold chop.

19th March 2006, 11:07	#5 \| Link
unmei frying subs Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: ch-2500 Posts: 891	yes from my experience vorbis could cost about 15% compared to mp3 on my (harddrive based!) iRiver, with no DRM involved at all.. A comparision between DRMed wma and mp3 really doesn't hold much value like that. It's a bit unfortunate because i think the point they want to make can most likely be made with a valid comparision (decoding DRM simply cannot be for free). __________________ -nyo

19th March 2006, 12:32	#6 \| Link
Doom9 clueless n00b Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: somewhere over the rainbow Posts: 10,579	I considered putting this in the news but at the end of the day, you'd have to exclude the decoding overhead of WMA and AAC versus MP3 to have a fair comparison.. without doing so, you have a void conclusion. __________________ For the web's most comprehensive collection of DVD backup guides go to www.doom9.org

19th March 2006, 15:34	#7 \| Link
shevegen Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 420	Problem is, in the end, you as customer (all customers with ipod + DRM for example) will pay the bills for recharging. The question is why to support with your money, laws that f*** you? From the perspective of a CEO, this is great. Buy shares of other companies, like energy giants. They will love it too, especially if more electronic devices demand more and more energy... __________________ OS: Paldo (Linux) AviSynth for Linux, go go go!

19th March 2006, 04:07	#2 \| Link
celtic_druid Registered User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,171	Why are they comparing DRM'ed WMA files to mp3's and not non DRM'ed WMA files?

19th March 2006, 08:02	#4 \| Link
foxyshadis ангел смерти Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Lost Posts: 9,558	AAC, WMA, and vorbis all require a lot more horsepower (and thus battery life) to decode, whether drm'd or not. Such is the downside of getting a lot more for your megs. I haven't cared about mp3 in 4 years, so I'd only be interested in a Fairplay vs plain AAC comparison, or c_d's suggestion.

19th March 2006, 15:38	#8 \| Link
celtic_druid Registered User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,171	Well my iPod lives in my car so essentially it is petrol powered. Last edited by celtic_druid; 19th March 2006 at 15:48.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode