titanmiller
join:2002-03-17
Grand Forks, ND | reply to komal
Re: They suck
I stopped using Real Player years ago, never looked back either and I dont plan on going back unless lots of people say that it truly is good. |
|
tdkyo
join:2002-12-07
Rochester, NY | I don't get why many sites are using real media files for their audio/video streaming files. I just skip to a different site because I hate to install real player crap. |
|
BIGMIKE
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Westminster, CA | NASA use real media files, it most have summing to do with MAC. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| said by BIGMIKE  :
NASA use real media files, it most have summing to do with MAC.
Not really because Quicktime's streaming format works on Mac and is far, far better than Real or Microsoft's formats.
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16 | Yeah, given a choice, quicktime is my preferred format. But mostly because it can't be easily streamed, so I can download the videos. |
|
ajkrueger
join:2000-12-11
Detroit, MI
| reply to tdkyo
Unless I am mistaken, major sites who use Real Media are GIVEN space on the REAL networks servers for FREE. This is a good reason to use them - ask, ABC News, CBS News... and all the other major sites that offer no choice. EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENT = FREE |
|
SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here
 ·CWLab
1 edit | reply to bmn
@Jaded Cynical Centrist Idealist
Hardly, Microsofts codecs for HD content kick the living crap out of anything Quicktime or Real could hope to produce.
If your machine can handle it, check out the following
»www.microsoft.com/windows/window···ase.aspx |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16
| Hardly what? Aren't you just echoing the rest of us? When MS first introduced WMP9 and the codecs, it released this page
»www.microsoft.com/windows/window···lity.asp
for the user to see if their system was powerful enough. |
|
SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here | Read & understand the entire thread before you comment. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to SND2005
said by SND2005 :
Hardly, Microsofts codecs for HD content kick the living crap out of anything Quicktime or Real could hope to produce.
Considering that's only for HD content... Other than that, WMP is a poor format. I know, I've worked with just about all of them for audio and video.
And even then, Quicktime has not released an HD version of the QT codec yet, so you are comparing apples to oranges. When Quicktime's HD codec comes out, it will probably trump WMP.
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
tdkyo
join:2002-12-07
Rochester, NY | Not exactly. Did you put in the factor of compression ratios? WMV can deliver a great video/sound stream in a fraction of quicktime's format. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| The compression ratio for WMP is about all that's in its favor... Artifacting, distortion, etc. happen much more with in than with other codecs, excluding Real. Realplayer's codec is probably the worst I've seen when it comes to problems like artifacting and distortion.
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16
| reply to SND2005
said by SND2005 :
Read & understand the entire thread before you comment.
Before you make yourself look foolish, you should clarify what you're responding to. |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16 | reply to bmn
When I need to cut down a movie's size, I use WMP format, I rarely notice a quality drop, and it reduces the size by up to (for me) 42%. |
|
SND2005
Premium
join:2001-09-15
Im Over Here
1 edit |  reply to komal
The only one at risk of looking foolish is you. If you look at the following comments its clear others have understood... |
|
tdkyo
join:2002-12-07
Rochester, NY | reply to bmn
What bandwidth settings have you been using?? If you put 1.5 megabit bandwidth for audio/video streaming when encoding, the quality is very very good! |
|
komal
join:2003-02-16 | Yeah, that's what I use. For some reason the supposedly higher quality settings have lower bitrates. But I use the encoding designed for streaming to 1.5 megabit connections, pretty much the highest quality possible with WMV format. |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to tdkyo
said by tdkyo :
What bandwidth settings have you been using?? If you put 1.5 megabit bandwidth for audio/video streaming when encoding, the quality is very very good!
I've worked with several different bandwidth settings. It depends on what was needed and how much bandwidth the server it was going to had...
--
Communism never failed, because it never existed...
Conservatives = enemies of personal freedom || Liberals = enemies of economic freedom |
|
