Reviews of All To WMA Converter

1. 
   ipx

   Reviewing 1.3 Beta (Oct 22, 2001)

   The program is good. High five to the creator for doing what Microsoft was too lazy to do. This is much easier for less computer-literate people to use, when compared with Microsoft's command line utility.
   
   Also I have to say that the WMA format really sucks. I usually use LAME to encode MP3s and I can crunch files smaller than WM and they sound better.
2. 
   OddFox

   Reviewing 1.3 Beta (Oct 22, 2001)

   It's good for what it does, too bad WMA's sound quality is a joke compared to MP3s. I used this to encode a couple mp3 files to WMA, and it's pretty funny. The MP3 was smaller than the WMA of equal quality. It sounded better as well, and in Winamp, I dunno if it's just me, but I can jump to certain parts of a song faster :). I never have liked WMA, and have never had a decent sounding WMA file (compared to my MP3 files). Sure it's smaller if you encode at 64kbps, too bad the sound quality is nowhere near as good as an MP3 file. On a desktop, I'd never sacrifice quality for space, and on an MP3 player, I still wouldn't if it had 64MB or more of storage.
3. 
   1450

   Reviewing 1.1 (Aug 21, 2001)

   I dun see yo probs bout WMA its a small file format that has a good sound quality for its size, mp3 is large and takes alot of hdd space at 128kbps which is dumb when wma at 64kbps sounds just as good but takes less hdd space, get real and get winamp 2.76 and get converting to wma coz its better!
4. 
   insoniq

   Reviewing 0.95 Beta (Jul 31, 2001)

   I don't know why all you guys are bashing on WMA. A typical MP3 is around 4-5mb, when you convert the file to WMA you get it at around 2-3mb. I personally have an mp3 player and I've tried WMA on it, you can have almost close to double of the songs in WMA than what you would have with the MP3 format. For desktop use I still use mp3s, but what makes WMA so unique is it's smaller size, which is *ideal* for MP3 players with 32-64mb.
5. 
   litoby

   Reviewing 0.95 Beta (Jul 31, 2001)

   I think the peopel that would use this program have portable digitable media players, thus makign wma a much more substantial decrease in file size while the same audio quality. and converting from mp3 to wma doesn't lose audio quality unless you go to a lower bitrate, which is why going from cd to wma makes more sense. but again, i think only mp3 player people would use this as wma in an mp3 player makes more sense because you can cram more songs in.

Discuss All To WMA Converter

No comments yet