Re: Pros and cons between WMA Lossless vs FLAC

I believe FLAC compresses to a smaller size than wma lossless (probably not a 
lot in it though).  That should translate to a bigger buffer in the Squeezebox.

FLAC is a fast decompressor - it should be less CPU intensive for playback.

I believe more people around here are using FLAC, and the Squeezebox has 
supported it natively a lot longer than WMA, so there's more chance of 
stability and support.

Phil