Hey snag1e, your replies were entertaining to read and you seem well-informed in your own way, and if you find that article that said Piracy is increasing CD sales can you please link it here? I'm interested in reading it.
I don't think people that have collected CD's for a long time should be bitter at some kid with a 1TB harddrive of discographies Lol, I mean it's totally different, I don't get excited when a torrent has reached 99%, but I do get excited from a parcel in the mail with a CD and booklet and smell and physical touch.
It's a bit like "pirated books", I mean where is the whole pirated books debate? Why doesn't anyone care about the pirated books!!
Try downloading a comic book and reading it on your computer, it's a horrible experience, compared to reading the real comic book.
However there are a lot of people that will buy a CD, convert it to .m4a, and dispose of the CD.
Then there are also a lot of people now that will never buy a CD in their life and think they belong in the 90's along with discmans.
These two groups of people confuse the issue for me, since group 1 is not partaking in piracy, and also not caring about the physical media or sound fidelity, either, group 2 is partaking in piracy, and not caring about physical media and most likely not the sound fidelity.
As for the thread title, users that prefer Flac are either going to be purists, or on a hi-fi quest.
Converting a CD to mp3 and then to Flac, is like taking Coke, converting it to Diet Coke, then adding some sugar and putting it back in the Coke bottle. So that's why you were getting repetetive violent reactions to your idea, from the coke lovers. ;]
I don't actually understand why converting mp3 to Flac results in a different file-size though, does it become much larger? I mean if you change .ZIP to .RAR they're pretty much the same size and information just different compression methods.