when people actually cared about saving HardDisk Drive space FLAC
and various other losless compression codecs were actually useful...
To my point of vew the only actually losless codecs that are useful
are those that can be directly played back on your portable device of choice.
For storing music files on your desktop there is no excuse for "needing" compression, yes they call FLAC "lossless"
but I personally have my doubts, because you always lose
something in decompression.
And HDD's are cheap and have probably dropped in price again as I've taken the time to type this.
You can buy a 320Gb HDD for about $50 that's $0.15/Gigabyte
when HDD space is HALF the price of blank recordable media....
Ok, I'll admit that it's POSSIBLE you can come up with an excuse for supporting losless compression codecs, but I'm not going to hold my breath while you think one up.
FLAC, WAV and others lack one thing to make them as "computer friendly" as mp3 files.... tags.
the ID3 tag is what makes mp3's shine for mobile (car)and portable (personal playback and notebook computers)
As for audio quality being "lower" with mp3's if that is truely
the case then to borrow a saying from a friend in Alabama;
"Ya'll ain't doin' it right!"
TOO much compression
POOR compression algorythm
(or simply the wrong one for the bitrate)
the idea that less data about the music automatically makes the sound inferior is hogwash.
The Human ear is an imprecise analog device.