VZW still disabling mp3 players?

I have the Samsung SCH-A950 which I have re-enabled the MP3 player on,
because I was quite pissed to learn that my phone would only play WMAs
out of the box since Verizon purposely hides the player, and I refuse to
further lose audio quality by recomposing a lossy format (MP3) to
another lossy format (WMA)...not to mention that WMA isn't really what I
would call standard anyway, and I refuse to support the format (I'm also
very anti-Microsoft, but I'll skip that for now).
While I am aware that it can easily be re-enabled on the VCast version
of the firmware, I decided to downgrade the firmware on my phone because
I found it to run much faster without all the VCast crap which I never
use anyway.
Since I don't like carrying multiple things around, I am quite happy
using my cell phone to play MP3s when I'm in the car and such. Granted,
there is no EQ or anything else "fancy" about it, but it doesn't matter
since most of the time I listen to it through the car stereo anyway.

My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
"force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music on
their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?

TIA
David

"David Matthew Wood" <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote in message
<snip>
>
> My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
> phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
> "force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music on
> their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
> user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?
>
> TIA
> David

My brother just switched to Vzw and his LG 8300 phone(I think that is the
model he has) will play MP3s right out of the box. I think all the phone
does by default to discourage newbies from loading the phone with their own
MP3 files, rather than buying them from Vzw, is hide the folder in memory
where files are stored.

I don't think I would get very worked up on limited format playback on a
cellphone. It's a minimal player with minimal features. Few of them even
vaguely hint a customer might use it as their primary music player. If the
phones played 20 different file formats you can be sure there would be
someone whining that yes they can only be seen in public with the newest
phone and that phone must play the Bob&Fred format or the world will end and
Vzw is satan himself. It's a phone, if it does something else that's a
bonus. Swiss Army knives are great not because their scissors and their
tweezers are the best such tools on the face of the earth but because they
have some stuff in one place just in case it will be handy.


--

Scott

"David Matthew Wood" <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote in message
news:nodmwood78-AB85DA.02361408022007@news.verizon.net...
>I have the Samsung SCH-A950 which I have re-enabled the MP3 player on,
> because I was quite pissed to learn that my phone would only play WMAs
> out of the box since Verizon purposely hides the player, and I refuse to
> further lose audio quality by recomposing a lossy format (MP3) to
> another lossy format (WMA)...not to mention that WMA isn't really what I
> would call standard anyway, and I refuse to support the format (I'm also
> very anti-Microsoft, but I'll skip that for now).
> While I am aware that it can easily be re-enabled on the VCast version
> of the firmware, I decided to downgrade the firmware on my phone because
> I found it to run much faster without all the VCast crap which I never
> use anyway.
> Since I don't like carrying multiple things around, I am quite happy
> using my cell phone to play MP3s when I'm in the car and such. Granted,
> there is no EQ or anything else "fancy" about it, but it doesn't matter
> since most of the time I listen to it through the car stereo anyway.
>
> My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
> phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
> "force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music on
> their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
> user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?
>
> TIA
> David


Davey my boy, you must lead one hell of an empty, vapid life totally devoid
of responsibility, social interaction or obligation if this is what you
whine about...

In article <ac2dnVCrI-Joj1bYnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Martin Kallikak, Jr." <noone> wrote:

> "David Matthew Wood" <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote in message
> news:nodmwood78-AB85DA.02361408022007@news.verizon.net...
> >I have the Samsung SCH-A950 which I have re-enabled the MP3 player on,
> > because I was quite pissed to learn that my phone would only play WMAs
> > out of the box since Verizon purposely hides the player, and I refuse to
> > further lose audio quality by recomposing a lossy format (MP3) to
> > another lossy format (WMA)...not to mention that WMA isn't really what I
> > would call standard anyway, and I refuse to support the format (I'm also
> > very anti-Microsoft, but I'll skip that for now).
> > While I am aware that it can easily be re-enabled on the VCast version
> > of the firmware, I decided to downgrade the firmware on my phone because
> > I found it to run much faster without all the VCast crap which I never
> > use anyway.
> > Since I don't like carrying multiple things around, I am quite happy
> > using my cell phone to play MP3s when I'm in the car and such. Granted,
> > there is no EQ or anything else "fancy" about it, but it doesn't matter
> > since most of the time I listen to it through the car stereo anyway.
> >
> > My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
> > phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
> > "force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music on
> > their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
> > user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?
> >
> > TIA
> > David
>
>
> Davey my boy, you must lead one hell of an empty, vapid life totally devoid
> of responsibility, social interaction or obligation if this is what you
> whine about...

Um....no, I just like to be able to use features that are supposed to
come with my phone, and not have them disabled because some business
wants me to use a different file format instead. The whole reason I
picked the a950 was because it was advertised as being able to play
mp3s. It's a cool thing to have built into your cell if you don't want
to carry multiple devices around.

In article <bufms2peojsof5b7i1j1mpccf2f5705rcm@4ax.com>,
Evan Platt <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:42:09 GMT, David Matthew Wood
> <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote:
>
> >Um....no, I just like to be able to use features that are supposed to
> >come with my phone, and not have them disabled because some business
> >wants me to use a different file format instead. The whole reason I
> >picked the a950 was because it was advertised as being able to play
> >mp3s. It's a cool thing to have built into your cell if you don't want
> >to carry multiple devices around.
>
> Where was it advertised the 950 plays mp3's?
>
> It's no longer on Verizon's site, at least for me.

Back when I was researching different phones, it was. Unfortunately, I
got mine just after Verizon started VCast, so unbeknown to me, it had
the new MP3 player disabling firmware on it already. All the 950s sold
prior to VCast had older firmware on them which had the MP3 players
intact.

If you look at the VCast FAQ now though, it says that the MP3 player is
removed when you put VCast on. This is BS. It's not removed, just
disabled. If you manage to find and download the settings utility and
use a data cable, you can enable the service menu on this phone and once
you're there you can turn the MP3 player back on. Verizon's public
reason for doing this is because "We wanted one music player on the
phone with a simple and consistent look and feel throughout the player.
If we were to leave (the MP3 support intact), then there would be two
players with different experiences."... meh I guess it's just me, but I
think that's a pretty lame reason. I mean what if a computer
manufacturer said that they wanted to simplify the interface for users,
and so they somehow made it so that the only media player that would
work on your PC would be Realplayer?

In article <15nms21802lf92jvfo0tabuk3b4ktcjcja@4ax.com>,
Pegleg <Pegleg@usnavyret.mil> wrote:

> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 12:42:09 GMT, David Matthew Wood
> <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote:
>
> >Um....no, I just like to be able to use features that are supposed to
> >come with my phone, and not have them disabled because some business
> >wants me to use a different file format instead. The whole reason I
> >picked the a950 was because it was advertised as being able to play
> >mp3s. It's a cool thing to have built into your cell if you don't want
> >to carry multiple devices around.
>
>
> Yea, and the quality of the sound is so great too!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> NOT!

Actually for an MP3 player built into a cell phone, it sounds pretty
damn good if use high bitrate MP3s like I do! Not CD quality of course
since it is MP3 afterall, but still it sounds good! If anything I
thought it was going to be noisey, what with all the electronics in the
phone, but no, it outputs very clean audio. It's on par with the
quality you get out of any average MP3 player. There is no EQ of
course, but for what I do with it, I don't need it to have one anyway.

The world is as it is. You can buy a gun and shoot everyone at the post
office because of some small annoyance or you can recognize even if Vzw
drove to your house and loaded your phone with all of your files, you would
stil have problems.

--

Scott

In article <v6ednVT2QsucGFbYnZ2dnUVZ_segnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"tscottme" <blahblah@blah.net> wrote:

> The world is as it is. You can buy a gun and shoot everyone at the post
> office because of some small annoyance or you can recognize even if Vzw
> drove to your house and loaded your phone with all of your files, you would
> stil have problems.

No, not if the phone was doing what it was supposed to do. This is
something that Samsung built into it and Verizon disabled. The ability
to use the phone as a wireless modem is another - granted it's easy to
re-enable it if you have the utility in hand, but still it's a feature
that should have been there from the beginning.

Bluetooth is yet another. Don't get me wrong, I do like their coverage.
That is why I have had Verizon since 02. But it is annoying that they
disable features that were there in the beginning. It's like what if
you got a car and it came with a really nice sound system (not as good
as say aftermarket, but in this case it works)? Say it came with a CD
player built in by the head unit's OEM, but the car dealer decided that
you should only listen to the radio and decided to disable the CD
player, making you pay extra for something that should already be there?
Same thing really.

In article <9_WdncE3q5wNGVbYnZ2dnUVZ_sapnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"tscottme" <blahblah@blah.net> wrote:

> "Martin Kallikak, Jr." <noone> wrote in message news:ac2dnVCrI-
>
> >
> > Davey my boy, you must lead one hell of an empty, vapid life totally
> > devoid of responsibility, social interaction or obligation if this is what
> > you whine about...
>
> Standby for more of this. With most children being only children this sort
> of thing will become the norm.

Wow...I was just asking a simple question, I didn't think that I'd get
replies from complete assholes. That's just the kind of thinking that
is making me want to leave Verizon in the first place.

In article <ac2dnVCrI-Joj1bYnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Martin
Kallikak, Jr." <noone> took the hamburger meat, threw it on the grill,
and I said "Oh Wow"...

> "David Matthew Wood" <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote in message
> news:nodmwood78-AB85DA.02361408022007@news.verizon.net...
> >I have the Samsung SCH-A950 which I have re-enabled the MP3 player on,
> > because I was quite pissed to learn that my phone would only play WMAs
> > out of the box since Verizon purposely hides the player, and I refuse to
> > further lose audio quality by recomposing a lossy format (MP3) to
> > another lossy format (WMA)...not to mention that WMA isn't really what I
> > would call standard anyway, and I refuse to support the format (I'm also
> > very anti-Microsoft, but I'll skip that for now).
> > While I am aware that it can easily be re-enabled on the VCast version
> > of the firmware, I decided to downgrade the firmware on my phone because
> > I found it to run much faster without all the VCast crap which I never
> > use anyway.
> > Since I don't like carrying multiple things around, I am quite happy
> > using my cell phone to play MP3s when I'm in the car and such. Granted,
> > there is no EQ or anything else "fancy" about it, but it doesn't matter
> > since most of the time I listen to it through the car stereo anyway.
> >
> > My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
> > phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
> > "force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music on
> > their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
> > user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?
> >
> > TIA
> > David
>
>
> Davey my boy, you must lead one hell of an empty, vapid life totally devoid
> of responsibility, social interaction or obligation if this is what you
> whine about...
>
>
>

It's a legitmate complaint. Why should someone pay for functionality
that the phone already comes with?

--
trippy
mhm31x9 Smeeter#29 WSD#30
sTaRShInE_mOOnBeAm aT HoTmAil dOt CoM

NP: "Back For More" -- Ratt

"Now, technology's getting better all the time and that's fine,
but most of the time all you need is a stick of gum, a pocketknife,
and a smile."

-- Robert Redford "Spy Game"

"trippy" <silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2035cfcbf2078a4e989d79@news.alt.net...
> In article <ac2dnVCrI-Joj1bYnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Martin
> Kallikak, Jr." <noone> took the hamburger meat, threw it on the grill,
> and I said "Oh Wow"...
>
>> "David Matthew Wood" <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote in message
>> news:nodmwood78-AB85DA.02361408022007@news.verizon.net...
>> >I have the Samsung SCH-A950 which I have re-enabled the MP3 player on,
>> > because I was quite pissed to learn that my phone would only play WMAs
>> > out of the box since Verizon purposely hides the player, and I refuse
>> > to
>> > further lose audio quality by recomposing a lossy format (MP3) to
>> > another lossy format (WMA)...not to mention that WMA isn't really what
>> > I
>> > would call standard anyway, and I refuse to support the format (I'm
>> > also
>> > very anti-Microsoft, but I'll skip that for now).
>> > While I am aware that it can easily be re-enabled on the VCast version
>> > of the firmware, I decided to downgrade the firmware on my phone
>> > because
>> > I found it to run much faster without all the VCast crap which I never
>> > use anyway.
>> > Since I don't like carrying multiple things around, I am quite happy
>> > using my cell phone to play MP3s when I'm in the car and such.
>> > Granted,
>> > there is no EQ or anything else "fancy" about it, but it doesn't matter
>> > since most of the time I listen to it through the car stereo anyway.
>> >
>> > My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
>> > phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
>> > "force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music
>> > on
>> > their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
>> > user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?
>> >
>> > TIA
>> > David
>>
>>
>> Davey my boy, you must lead one hell of an empty, vapid life totally
>> devoid
>> of responsibility, social interaction or obligation if this is what you
>> whine about...
>>
>>
>>
>
> It's a legitmate complaint. Why should someone pay for functionality
> that the phone already comes with?
>
> --
> trippy


It's a legitimate complaint if the phone was advertised as playing mp3 files
and it doesn't play them. But it didn't provoke him to cancel his contract
during the trial period. Surely if mp3 playback was such an important
feature he wouldn't wait for weeks and weeks before attempting to play mp3
files for the first time? If cirmcumstances conspired such that he finds
himself with the phone, past the trial period, and bitter he could rip a
copy of all important files and play them on his phone. The absence of any
effort to cope with this grave injustice suggests this complaint is just a
excuse to complain about the evil phone company.


--

Scott

In article <Ob2dnRsExdlKp1HYnZ2dnUVZ_uqvnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"tscottme" <blahblah@blah.net> wrote:

> "trippy" <silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2035cfcbf2078a4e989d79@news.alt.net...
> > In article <ac2dnVCrI-Joj1bYnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com>, "Martin
> > Kallikak, Jr." <noone> took the hamburger meat, threw it on the grill,
> > and I said "Oh Wow"...
> >
> >> "David Matthew Wood" <nodmwood78@verizonspam.net> wrote in message
> >> news:nodmwood78-AB85DA.02361408022007@news.verizon.net...
> >> >I have the Samsung SCH-A950 which I have re-enabled the MP3 player on,
> >> > because I was quite pissed to learn that my phone would only play WMAs
> >> > out of the box since Verizon purposely hides the player, and I refuse
> >> > to
> >> > further lose audio quality by recomposing a lossy format (MP3) to
> >> > another lossy format (WMA)...not to mention that WMA isn't really what
> >> > I
> >> > would call standard anyway, and I refuse to support the format (I'm
> >> > also
> >> > very anti-Microsoft, but I'll skip that for now).
> >> > While I am aware that it can easily be re-enabled on the VCast version
> >> > of the firmware, I decided to downgrade the firmware on my phone
> >> > because
> >> > I found it to run much faster without all the VCast crap which I never
> >> > use anyway.
> >> > Since I don't like carrying multiple things around, I am quite happy
> >> > using my cell phone to play MP3s when I'm in the car and such.
> >> > Granted,
> >> > there is no EQ or anything else "fancy" about it, but it doesn't matter
> >> > since most of the time I listen to it through the car stereo anyway.
> >> >
> >> > My question though is this. Is Verizon still doing this on their
> >> > phones? That is, are they still hiding the MP3 function so they can
> >> > "force" users to convert everything to WMAs if they wish to put music
> >> > on
> >> > their phones memory cards? I know the LG Chocolate plays MP3s without
> >> > user modification, but what about Verizon's other new phones?
> >> >
> >> > TIA
> >> > David
> >>
> >>
> >> Davey my boy, you must lead one hell of an empty, vapid life totally
> >> devoid
> >> of responsibility, social interaction or obligation if this is what you
> >> whine about...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > It's a legitmate complaint. Why should someone pay for functionality
> > that the phone already comes with?
> >
> > --
> > trippy
>
>
> It's a legitimate complaint if the phone was advertised as playing mp3 files
> and it doesn't play them.

And it was when I ordered it, which is why I picked this phone as part
of "new every two".

> But it didn't provoke him to cancel his contract
> during the trial period.

Because as a subscriber since 2002, not to mention that there are other
phones on this account that are locked in by contract, I couldn't
cancel, that's why. There was no trial period.

> Surely if mp3 playback was such an important
> feature he wouldn't wait for weeks and weeks before attempting to play mp3
> files for the first time? If cirmcumstances conspired such that he finds
> himself with the phone, past the trial period, and bitter he could rip a
> copy of all important files and play them on his phone.

That's completely illogical. Why should I have to lose more quality by
converting one lossy format to yet another lossy format when the phone
already has the software to play MP3s on it anyway? Not to mention that
WMA is a proprietary format with extremely limited support on platforms
other than Windows, while MP3 is a STANDARD format which has TONS of
support and is cross-platform. You are aware that there are other
operating systems out there, and that not all of us run Windows, right?

> The absence of any
> effort to cope with this grave injustice suggests this complaint is just a
> excuse to complain about the evil phone company.

See, I love how you make these assumptions without first checking to see
if they're true or not.

At any rate, I asked a simple question since it is again almost time for
my "new every two". It plays a big part of whether or not I plan to
stay with Verizon or switch to someone else once this contract expires.
Does Verizon still disable features like this on their phones, yes or
no? I fail to see why you have to get so defensive about it and make it
so complicated. In fact, it is smart ass replies like yours and
Martin's that make me want to switch even more.

In article <Q_0zh.22476$w91.1147@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink .net>,
"SlobbyDon" <slobby_NIXSPAMdon@mail.ru> wrote:

> David Matthew Wood wrote:
> > In article <v6ednVT2QsucGFbYnZ2dnUVZ_segnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > "tscottme" <blahblah@blah.net> wrote:
> >
> > Bluetooth is yet another. Don't get me wrong, I do like their
> > coverage. That is why I have had Verizon since 02. But it is
> > annoying that they disable features that were there in the beginning.
> > It's like what if you got a car and it came with a really nice sound
> > system (not as good as say aftermarket, but in this case it works)?
> > Say it came with a CD player built in by the head unit's OEM, but the
> > car dealer decided that you should only listen to the radio and
> > decided to disable the CD player, making you pay extra for something
> > that should already be there? Same thing really.
>
> Can you play mp3s through bluetooth? I've tried to do that and it didn't
> work.

I'm not sure if it's doable on the a950 or not, as I've never tried that
before. Usually I just use it to play MP3s through the car stereo using
this adaptor: http://www.cellularaccessory.com/aets43cseb.html

Switch companies, it makes no difference to me one way or another. If you
were posting exactly the same message about any carrier I would say the same
thing.

The darn music files can't be very important, despite your postings, if you
aren't willing to make them playable on your phone. You will be listening
to degraded sound whether you play 320 kbps ogg vorbis, MP3 or any format,
it's a phone not a studio monitor. It's only a very limited mp3 player,
it's a phone.

Even if the mp3 elves broke into your home and loaded the music files on
your phone and hacked the phone to accept telepathic file transfer of every
file format, the phone have limited capacity. I have been around usenet
long enough to recognize when someone is elevating one feature as the most
important feature only for the sake of comaplaining that feature doesn't
suit them. Every other shortcoming of using a phone as mp3 player is
suitable as a complaint. Current users on current phones are able to play
mp3 files. In my brother's case he simply loades them on the memory card
and install the memory card. That's a terrible effort, but somehow he
manages to overcome such indignity.

If the music was important you would lift a finger to put them where you
absolutely can hear them. The fact you won't lift a finger indicates the
truth of the situation.
--

Scott

In article <GdadnXOP3vS_mlDYnZ2dnUVZ_rWnnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"tscottme" <blahblah@blah.net> wrote:

> Switch companies, it makes no difference to me one way or another. If you
> were posting exactly the same message about any carrier I would say the same
> thing.
>
> The darn music files can't be very important, despite your postings, if you
> aren't willing to make them playable on your phone.

I did make them playable on my phone, by "modifying" my phone and
re-enabling the MP3 player. My point is though, I should not have had
to do this.

> You will be listening
> to degraded sound whether you play 320 kbps ogg vorbis, MP3 or any format,
> it's a phone not a studio monitor. It's only a very limited mp3 player,
> it's a phone.

Limited only in features. You'd be surprised with how good the audio
quality is actually. I myself thought it would be very noisy and
extremely lacking, but this isn't the case at all. It is very clean
audio.


> Even if the mp3 elves broke into your home and loaded the music files on
> your phone and hacked the phone to accept telepathic file transfer of every
> file format, the phone have limited capacity. I have been around usenet
> long enough to recognize when someone is elevating one feature as the most
> important feature only for the sake of comaplaining that feature doesn't
> suit them.

Did I ever say this was the most important feature of my phone? No, I
did not. It is however the reason I picked this phone, because I
thought it would be nice to have an MP3 player WITHOUT carrying extra
stuff around with me. Well after "hacking" my phone (although
technically I wouldn't really call it hacking - even though some people
would), it does exactly what I want.

> Every other shortcoming of using a phone as mp3 player is
> suitable as a complaint. Current users on current phones are able to play
> mp3 files. In my brother's case he simply loades them on the memory card
> and install the memory card. That's a terrible effort, but somehow he
> manages to overcome such indignity.

And that is exactly what I was asking.

> If the music was important you would lift a finger to put them where you
> absolutely can hear them. The fact you won't lift a finger indicates the
> truth of the situation.

Huh???!! If you even bothered to read my original post, you would know
that I did get my phone to play them, by downgrading the firmware. The
point is though, I should not have had to.