..excluding ATRAC3 and assuming same bitrate...

GUESS what format you should encode your music into to get maximum battery life!

(Note, MP3 encoded using LAME -q 0, LC-AAC encoded using Nero's encoder)

(This post was last modified: 10/06/2007 04:54 AM by ZiNgA BuRgA.)

WMA..? its just my guess

Wma

Based on simplicity, MP3 is the easiest to decode, lowest complexity. Followed by WMA and LC-AAC.

But battery life also depends on what program is playing the music file. Some programs are more efficient. Also depends on the encoder sometimes.

The obvious answer is MP3, BUT If it was that obvious, i don't think Zinga would've made us guess. Judging from Zinga's personality i doubt it's MP3. There has to be a catch. Probably something like a more complicated format being playable on a different program that uses less battery or something.

Also, DRM will kill the battery life, as it forces extra work. So if ur an idiot, and encode with DRM, then that'll probably take the most battery life.


hmmm... Since AAC is that much more complecated that MP3, i say it won't really be AAC.


Based on logic alone, i would lead towards MP3, BUT it's also likely that Zinga's not going to ask that question if it is... BUT MP3 is that much more simple than  LC-AAC... Dammit, i guess WMA.

If it really was MP3, then i'd be really pissed.

^^ O_o, interesting.

Actually, I sorda think it's hardware decoded.  The player used is the same (XMB).  I had to reduce the CPU to under 10MHz to notice any lag at all.

But why WMA?  To take out an option, WMA is actually the slowest :)

EDIT: No DRM used.

(This post was last modified: 10/06/2007 06:10 AM by ZiNgA BuRgA.)

ORGAN Wrote:WMA..? its just my guess

LC-AAC for the trick aspect of this, as assassinator pointed out.

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:^^ O_o, interesting.

Actually, I sorda think it's hardware decoded.  The player used is the same (XMB).  I had to reduce the CPU to under 10MHz to notice any lag at all.

But why WMA?  To take out an option, WMA is actually the slowest :)

EDIT: No DRM used.

U did not notice that i didn't vote yet did u? I only "said" that i voted WMA. So thanks for the clue ^.^. I'll take that into mind when actually voting.

And as for why i decided on WMA, Complexity cancels LC-AAC, and false straight-forwardness cancels MP3. The reasoning's all there:

Assassinator Wrote:Based on logic alone, i would lead towards MP3, BUT it's also likely that Zinga's not going to ask that question if it is... BUT MP3 is that much more simple than  LC-AAC... Dammit, i guess WMA.

So now it's between MP3 and LC-AAC.

I want to vote MP3, cause it's far less complicated than LC-AAC, but i still have doubts on Zinga making us vote if it really was that obvious.

Actually, since it's hardware decoded, why is WMA slower? It's lower in complexity than LC-AAC...

How is WMA lower in complexity?  Just because the compression isn't as good, doesn't mean it's easier to decode...

Well then, MP3 is actually the fastest - yep, it's straight-forward.
But yeah, the catch: usually LC-AAC can be encoded at lower bitrates than MP3 with the same quality.  So, how does a 128kbps MP3 compare with a 96kbps LC-AAC? (I personally don't think they're equal in quality, but meh).

By the way, with hardware decoding, the CPU still has to do some work.

ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:How is WMA lower in complexity?  Just because the compression isn't as good, doesn't mean it's easier to decode...

I just thought that from the fact that WMA is weaker in compression, far older, and has support from most MP3 players, some of which are really old. I mean if something is older, weaker, and supported by very old and weak MP3 players made 4 yrs ago... Then is it that wrong to assume that it is less complicated?

Anyways. double you tee eff!!! It's more complicated? That just goes to show gay WMA is.

SBR for the win.


Well then, MP3 is actually the fastest - yep, it's straight-forward.

Assassinator Wrote:If it really was MP3, then i'd be really pissed.