View Full Version : Not Quicktime
If we are going to lose the large MOV in favor for M4V, could it at least have the correct title under the downloads, please?
Apple iTunes Video != Apple Quicktime
spiri
10-01-2007, 08:41 PM
How about just naming it m4v or h.264? The other formats are named Xvid and WMV. I think the extension/encoding makes more sense... I don't use QuickTime to play the "QuickTime videos".
How about just naming it m4v or h.264? The other formats are named Xvid and WMV. I think the extension/encoding makes more sense...
I don't know if changing the title to the extension/encoding would be better then calling it by the wrappers actual name. But either way it would be better then what it's called now, which is wrong.
I don't use QuickTime to play the "QuickTime videos".
I also don't use Quicktime (hideous program) to play the MOV files and now that the encoding has changed, I'm going to be downloading the larger XviD instead.
spiri
10-02-2007, 06:48 PM
VLC is a lovely player :)
VLC is a lovely player
IMO, even better players include KMPlayer and MPC. Both have much better interfaces/controls, and like VLC, play virtually everything.
iccanui
10-03-2007, 12:16 AM
actually QT is a great player, for mov files. I find it to be better then VLC for the apple native formats.
But whats this about losing .mov ? News to me. We been talking about it but i dont think heard anything from rev3.
I want .mp4 please :)
actually QT is a great player, for mov files. I find it to be better then VLC for the apple native formats.
Maybe on the Apple. IMO, some of the problems with Quicktime Player is that it's too bloated for just playback use. It needs a loader running all the time to help make it look like it launches quickly. Some of the preferences are broken. It screws around with the Clipboard unnecessarily. It won't load files which happen to have long file names and then returns a meaningless error message. And, those are the ones I remember, I know there are others. :)
But whats this about losing .mov ? News to me. We been talking about it but i dont think heard anything from rev3.
The change was mentioned inside a thread , I don't remember which one. But the easiest way would be to look at any of the recent so-called "Quicktime Large" files in the download area.
scienceking
10-03-2007, 06:22 AM
Yeah, I personally think that Media Player classic with a good codec pack ends up performing much better than VLC, as much as it pains me to say so. I usually use VLC for its more advanced features, but for just playback in windows, its MPC for me.
Of course as a mostly Mac/Linux user, I don't use either that much. Qucktime Pro on the Mac is way better than VLC with perian installed. The actual real player for Mac and Linux doesn't suck like the windows version does. And Linux has tons of media players that work better than VLC for playback.
VLC to me is really more for converting/processing/streaming stuff that you are playing.
Yeah, I personally think that Media Player classic with a good codec pack ends up performing much better than VLC, as much as it pains me to say so.
I use FFdShow.
The actual real player for Mac and Linux doesn't suck like the windows version does.
I presume by "real player", you're talking about Quicktime, and not the player of the same name.
If so, it would be an opportunity for Apple to show how great the QT player is, but it fails miserably on the PC. Also, Apple goes out of their way to hide the actual standalone player. Typically, people think they need to install iTunes to get the player and they don't.
I see that a new Rev3 Gazette episode is listed that perpetuates the lie that there is a large "Quicktime" file available for download. Rev3 really should hire someone who knows how to write HTML.
heyseuss
10-05-2007, 09:12 AM
If so, it would be an opportunity for Apple to show how great the QT player is, but it fails miserably on the PC. Also, Apple goes out of their way to hide the actual standalone player. Typically, people think they need to install iTunes to get the player and they don't.
Sounds like the same thing as playing WMV's on a Mac version of Windows Media Player. Don't know what you mean about Apple going out of their way to hide the player, it's as easy, or as difficult to find as Windows Media Player. Also, Apple has nothing to with what people think. It's natural for windows users to have some confusion when trying to use an application from another operating system, probably the same as when a Mac user uses Windows software.
Not completely sure as I've never used mac software on a windows machine, but I do know that windows hasn't updated it's media viewer for mac, in several years.
scienceking
10-05-2007, 09:19 AM
No, I meant Real Networks' Real Player. Real Player sucks bad on windows, but works good under OSX and Linux. In fact, the real player base code project, Helix, is now the default in Suse if I have heard correctly. Its kind of strange, because Real Player brings up images of the devil to windows geeks, but its really a great product on the Unix side.
There is no Linux version of Quicktime. Apple seems to hate Linux even more than MS does for some reason.
T
he Mac version of Quicktime works great for playback. Of course its pretty annoying until you upgrade to pro, but thats easy enough to do(how ever you wish to submit your payment, of course). I'm not a big fan of how it tries to be an editing tool and a playback tool at the same time, and it just leads to confusing behavior, much like the behavior seen by the multiple personality disorder of KDE3's konqueror. Most of the problems with the windows version is like Safari, its a pretty rough port of the OSX code, which of course is not going to be very well optimized for Windows. I think Apple is torn on whether or not to play nice with Windows with their products. So they have come up with some compromise of releasing them with as little effort as necessary put in to get it to compile and run on Windows.
heyseuss
10-05-2007, 10:17 AM
No, I meant Real Networks' Real Player.
HA, I thought you meant the real QT player as well.
The Mac version of Quicktime works great for playback. Of course its pretty annoying until you upgrade to pro, but thats easy enough to do(how ever you wish to submit your payment, of course). I'm not a big fan of how it tries to be an editing tool and a playback tool at the same time, and it just leads to confusing behavior,
What's annoying about pre-pro playback? Most mac users wouldn't know the difference between playback on pro or pre. And it was good that it was an editing tool, thank god sorenson did that, because you weren't going to get anything else to edit with back then.
Most of the problems with the windows version is like Safari, its a pretty rough port of the OSX code, which of course is not going to be very well optimized for Windows. I think Apple is torn on whether or not to play nice with Windows with their products. So they have come up with some compromise of releasing them with as little effort as necessary put in to get it to compile and run on Windows.
Sounds like WMV for mac.