Since it's lossless, why not use the CODEC with the most support and least hassle?
Some people would argue that FLAC is the codec with the most support and least hassle. Just because a few proprietary players don't support FLAC, that doesn't mean it is the WMA is the best format. All it means is that something is going on (MS arm twisting maybe) that is keeping FLAC off those players. I don't trust anything done by MS anymore, especially not media players. (Just look at what they did with their music service.) MS doesn't even supply a DVD codec with WMP. I suspect the reason they developed WMA is because they don't want to pay royalties for MP3 either. (Not that I blame them with all the problems in the MP3 arena.) So MS develops a new compression scheme and all of a sudden it's the best supported because 90% of computers run Windows? Well not for most people it isn't. Open source software has way better support than any MS software. Any proprietary format being sold by a large corporation is subject to the whims of that corporation. Considering that MS is business partners with media companies that want to take away fair use rights for copyrighted material for all consumers, I wouldn't trust them with my music.