I guess I read "so long suckers" as glee
Not at all.
It just that the amount of outright misinformation and Hype they used to introduce and market this device was a disservice to those of us who actually care about fidelity and work on ways to improve the sound of our records in a very obvious way, and certainly not just by denigrating existing formats as some evil boogyman to be vanquished by using a "better" DAC and through-hole capacitors..
So long suckers, indeed,
You mentioned Spotify. It's horrible, but that has nothing to do with the us/them dichotomy that lured unsuspecting consumers into Pono-land.
Spotify streams at 160kbps.
This is not an ideal rate for music,and you can hear artifacts in some material, especially if the mastering engineer clips the ADC for "loudness".
You can subscribe to Spotify "premium" but if you do, you must *manually* select 320kbps as a playback rate. This is certainly acceptable as a streaming rate. If consumers are interested in higher fidelity, they can purchase 16/44.1 FLAC or uncompressed files.
The question that few asked is whether Pono was better than an iPhone, etc... I've seen measurement data and it doesn't look like the differences are at a level that would be audible to anyone.
So what they're selling, and what you're defending, is the mythology that they've achieved "better", and you are supporting it with a straw man argument that if anyone doesn't agree that "better is better" then they must be _____.
So, no, not glee.. just satisfaction that such an unscientific and predatory marketing machine has not been able to "fool all of the people all of the time"...
So long suckers...