![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I havent read the responses from other people but would like to put my 2
cents in anyways. I think that a majority of the population is on "high speed" now. I would go for high bandwidth with the least intrusion necessary. By intrusion I mean having to install software. Therfore I would say .mov and .ra is way out of question. Just go with the standard high resolution .mpg. If bandwidth is the key factor, go with .wmv. Im sure the Macintosh guys will have another say, but remember that 90% of the world uses Microsoft. -- John Huthmaker PPL-SEL P-28-161 http://www.cogentnetworking.com "John T" wrote in message m... I share a number of flying videos on my web site in both Windows Media and Real Video formats. Frankly, I'm tiring of spending the time to render both high- and low-bandwidth versions of each video in two formats (making four files for each video), so I'm considering using a single format for all videos - which brings me to my question: Given a choice to download the following formats, which would you choose and why? MPEG-4 WMV (v9) Real (v10) Some issues for consideration include: Size. MPEG-1/2 files are simply too large compared to Real and WMV. While storage isn't an issue, bandwidth is (and I run my own server that does not sit on a backbone). Quality. WMV and Real offer decent quality at a bitrate of ~250kbps. Of course, lower bitrates of ~53kbps (to support modem users) drastically cut down the quality in any format, but WMV and Real offer at least enough information to pick out a runway while on final. ![]() similar quality for only a slightly larger file (for instance, a sample 1 minute video is about 1.99MB in WMV and 2.02MB in MPEG-4 for similar bitrates). Playback. Windows Media Player (WMP) is free and widespread on the most popular PC operating system. Real Player is free and is bundled with many name brand computers. There is a fairly wide range of players compatible with MPEG-4, though, including proprietary players (like Real and QuickTime [also free]) and "third-party" players. Compatibility. WMV and Real are proprietary formats, but they are relatively "open" and encoders are freely available for both formats. They also have the backing of some of the largest players (business-wise) in the computer industry. MPEG-4 is a standard published by international standards bodies, but licensing issues have kept encoders out of the mainstream for several years. However, that appears to be less of an issue now with a fairly wide availability (not necessarily distribution) of encoders and players. While most users are likely running some flavor of Windows, there is a large number of non-Microsoft users (both in OS and software in general). MPEG-4 would appear to be the cross-platform format of choice, but not unless there is a large enough market penetration of players. Thanks for your input! -- John T http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com ____________________ |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave wrote:
WMV Please! Real is always a prob, tries to take over all kinds of stuff... ![]() I too, dislike Real Player. I've been using Real Alternative, a free version of Windows Media Player Classic modified to to play Real files. It works for me. http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm A Quicktime Alternative is also available. http://www.free-codecs.com/download/...lternative.htm For videos I vote for for MPG first, WMV second, and Real never. - John Ousterhout - |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Huthmaker wrote:
I havent read the responses from other people but would like to put my 2 cents in anyways. I think that a majority of the population is on "high speed" now. I would go for high bandwidth with the least intrusion necessary. By intrusion I mean having to install software. Therfore I would say .mov and .ra is way out of question. Just go with the standard high resolution .mpg. If bandwidth is the key factor, go with .wmv. Im sure the Macintosh guys will have another say, but remember that 90% of the world uses Microsoft. And this is a good thing how? I'm another one that is not a Microsoft user. Anyone got WMV for Unix/Linux? If so, then I'll concede the point. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Blanche" wrote in message
... I'm another one that is not a Microsoft user. Anyone got WMV for Unix/Linux? If so, then I'll concede the point. What about: http://www.mplayerhq.com/ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I too, dislike Real Player.
Actually, after years of berating (and hating) RealPlayer for being a system hog, I've found their newest version to be pretty nice. It doesn't seem to shanghai your operating system as much anymore, and it also opens more quickly. And almost anything is better than Quicktime, although their newest version is better, too. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:kFKCf.760301$xm3.302750@attbi_s21... Actually, after years of berating (and hating) RealPlayer for being a system hog, I've found their newest version to be pretty nice. It doesn't seem to shanghai your operating system as much anymore, and it also opens more quickly. It probably opens more quickly because it's booted as soon as you log in. In other words, it uses up system resources even when you don't need it, just so it can look faster if and when you do need it. And almost anything is better than Quicktime, although their newest version is better, too. I doubt you'd find many to agree to that statement. I had to go through some hoops to stop Quicktime from starting up every time I logged on to my PC (as I would with Real as well). But I still find it worse than Real. It's definitely a step up from them, at least in my opinion. Pete |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2006-01-26, John T wrote:
Given a choice to download the following formats, which would you choose and why? MPEG-4 Because it plays on ALL platforms on ALL cpu architectures, and the video is still likely to be viewable in 25 years time. Closed, proprietary formats (such as WMV and Real) are simply unacceptable. (Imagine if TV only worked with one brand of television - that's what you're getting with WMV or Real). While we are at it, I did a short experimental video of attaching my bullet camera to the pilot's step of our glider tow plane yesterday. http://www.alioth.net/Video/Auster_rear_view.mp4 As always, the (free and open source) VideoLAN Client (http://www.videolan.org) plays this beautifully, as does QuickTime. I really can't recommend VideoLAN client more highly - it's simply the best video player I've used, and plays pretty much any format you throw at it, and is available for the Mac, Windows, Linux, *BSD, PocketPC etc. -- Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2006-01-27, John Huthmaker wrote:
high resolution .mpg. If bandwidth is the key factor, go with .wmv. Im sure the Macintosh guys will have another say, but remember that 90% of the world uses Microsoft. MPEG-4 is just as good for bandwidth, and is not restricted to Microsoft software, and will play on any modern OS and any modern CPU. WMV is a bit like having a TV that would only work with one TV company's signal. Closed standards should be avoided for video/web/audio. -- Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
MPEG-4 Because it plays on ALL platforms on ALL cpu architectures... I really can't recommend VideoLAN client more highly - it's simply the best video player I've used, and plays pretty much any format you throw at it, and is available for the Mac, Windows, Linux, *BSD, PocketPC etc. Thanks for your vote. Just playing the devil's advocate for a moment... ![]() Couldn't your last comment be an argument for WMV or Real, as well? After all VLC can play those formats and it's available for just about any OS. -- John T http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com ____________________ |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2006-01-30, John T wrote:
Couldn't your last comment be an argument for WMV or Real, as well? After all VLC can play those formats and it's available for just about any OS. No - VLC can only play WMV on x86 platforms (i.e. PCs). It can't play WMV on a PowerPC Macintosh or Linux on non-x86 systems, including amd64. It plays WMV =9 on a Linux system by using the Microsoft codec (which is available only for x86 processors). -- Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
MSFS 2004 Video frame rate very slow | Greg Brown | Simulators | 1 | November 11th 05 07:24 PM |
Boeing 747 & 777 autoland in crosswind certification video - impressive! | Alt Beer | Piloting | 124 | November 9th 05 03:10 AM |