As I said before. If you do not really care much for music, CDs are fine. Vinyl is for people that really like and enjoy music to a high degree. You obviously don't.
I often agree with your astute comments Pauly. However, this time you have me bewildered.
Surely people who like and enjoy music to a high degree would choose to listen to CD's or whatever popular medium of choice with the most widely available selection.
Gregadd's point about additional cost, limited music selections, and listening time lost tinkering around with previous generation technology is a fair one. Even if, as you contest, Vinyl always sounds better, it is certainly not without major drawbacks.
I have some lossy compressed iTunes music store stuff that sounds great when burned to redbook (despite the lossy compression). This is not always the case but I don't go round slamming iTunes as crap for non music lovers!
Anyone who cares to download Grace Jones "Slave to the Rhythm" Hot Blooded Mix from iTunes (and burn it to a redbook CD to play on their system) will be pleasantly surprised at the recording quality! Go on try it! It may be a bit over engineered but that is the recording engineer not the AAC 128 Kbit per second compression.
Now - try to find this track in a bricks and mortar CD store or try to find it on Vinyl!
So why did I download this poorer quality file?...because I love music!!! - so I do this kind of thing all the time to supplement my library. Music lovers hear something on the radio and bingo they impulsively want to get it. Music lovers often want all the alternate versions of a song/symphony that they like (live, re-mix, 12" monster mix, radio-edit, different venues, different conductors/orchestras etc.)
Given a modest quality Hi-Fi, music lovers realize that the musicians/venue/recording/mastering studio actually has a bigger impact on the sound & musical quality than the media it arrives; tape, Vinyl, CD, or iTunes. Just my two cents from 'ol "tin ears"!