Doing everything that iTunes does is part of the problem. Why would you want that?

Not that iTunes's bloat and suck can be attributed just to having too many features.

I have trouble relating to your position on this. So you can decide you don't want to follow some particular god, fine. What does this have to do with actually believing in him? Have I been misled into thinking that people who "believe in god" actually believe he exists, instead of just playing along with the ceremonies because it's what their culture does?

Wouldn't others be prevented from patenting such things because of prior art?

Where do you get music that has frequencies above 22kHz? Is it not more likely that you would get unwanted noise than actual signal in supersonic frequencies because they cannot be deliberately mastered? Even if the high frequency signals came from the recording as intended, AND the speaker could play that high, they would just produce intermodulation distortion on the speaker degrading the quality of the actually audible spectrum.

There is individual variation of course, with claims going as far up as 25kHz. 100kHz however is clearly overkill.

No, you do that because it is the obvious thing to do. I remember back in the 90s when one-line screens on cell phones were the norm and Nokia's newer models had bigger, higher res ones, it was clear to me way back then that the screen size is the primary usability factor of a phone and that touch screens would be inevitable. I do not claim to have been any visionary, I claim that it was obvious to every dumb kid not even yet in high school 20 years ago. As for the lack of buttons... it is a very serious compromise, there's no denying it. It is also the obviously right choice if you want the web in your pocket, as there's really no other choice.

Your sarcasm detector must be broken, clearly grandparent is insinuating that there aren't many ways to design a touch screen phone. Which there aren't. So it follows that all touch screen phones look more or less alike.

With digital EQing and convolution $24 headphones or canalbuds can sound just fine. Frequency response is the most important factor affecting quality of sound for both headphones and speakers, and this is exactly what you can fix with a good equalizer. I love the PortaPros I have that cost 20€ on sale after just a very crude measurement of impulse response with the free and excellent DRC and a convolver audio effect. On my Sansa Clip+ with Rockbox I use the 5 band parametric EQ to fix the sound of my Sony EX50LPs, which are my most used headphones despite me owning full size headphones and canalbuds 5 times the price (which are great, too, and will no doubt last me longer, but are not as tiny, convenient and care free).

Of course there are many factors you cannot fix with EQ - distortion being a big problem with many types of headphones, quickness (as measured by waterfall plots), sensitivity and impedance (you want these to be a good match with your source), noise isolation, repeatability of seal, not to forget the inaudible but important factors such as comfort, build quality and style.

The ideal frequency response of headphones is still open for debate - most headphones shoot for a diffuse field response. Regardless of ideal most headphones have obvious flaws in their frequency response that can be fixed with the tools available for free.

I too use rockbox on the Sansa Clip+ and I must say that it is amazing. I'm a sound quality nazi and I find the 5 band parametric(!) equalizer a requirement to make even expensive canalbuds sound bearable. The Clips also have really good headphone amps. The player is tiny and has a standard mini USB socket instead of nasty proprietary cables. With rockbox installed it will play an insane range of file formats. It is also cheap as chips.

I don't foresee any phone replacing it as my primary music listening device (and I do have an iPhone).