|
|
| -Didi |
| Posted: Mar 13 2004, 06:08 PM |
 |
|
Unregistered
|
thanx!
.. interesting thread |
|
| i4004 |
| Posted: Mar 13 2004, 08:31 PM |
|
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2432
Member No.: 4935
Joined: 24-June 03
|
| QUOTE | | However, Quicktime is a widespread platform not to be ignored. |
bah....
QT is so "widespread" that only apple folks use it(less than 5% of overall computer users, i guess),and they use it because they must.....(because almost only apple writes the software for apple)
or am i wrong?
ohh...just to add this;and then apple has the nerve to call ms monopolists?
while they are selling most expensive machines and writing all the soft for those????
ahh...
as i usually say,QT would fly once opensource commune would take it into it's hands...untill then,it's dead meat....
edit;
"less than 5% of overall computer users"
instead of
"less than 5%"
--------------------
my signature:
 |
|
| stephanV |
| Posted: Mar 13 2004, 08:35 PM |
|
|
Spam killer ;)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 4348
Member No.: 8917
Joined: 18-February 04
|
a lot of movietrailers are in quicktime-format... thats all i ever use it for... 
--------------------
useful links:
VirtualDub, Input plugins and filters, AviSynth, AVI-Mux GUI, AC3ACM by fcchandler, VirtualDub FAQ |
|
| Cyberman |
| Posted: Mar 14 2004, 12:23 AM |
|
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2035
Member No.: 3477
Joined: 3-April 03
|
| QUOTE (stephanV @ Mar 13 2004, 09:35 PM) | | a lot of movietrailers are in quicktime-format... |
Probably to keep the content safe. There´s no better safeguard than using technology hardly anyone has access to. Face it - how many are there that can extract the data from a QT file? (Not counting those on this board, of course).
It´s like RealMedia - a try to prevent others from getting the video.
Encoding programs that make encoding look easy are another reason, probably...
--------------------
Matroska/MKV ? |
|
| dlandelle |
| Posted: Mar 27 2004, 11:48 AM |
|
|
Unregistered
|
Well,
The business model of "illegal codecs" is not simple.
They generate indirect revenues : MP3 is no more a business for hackers 
Also, since we all have a "non-profit" spirit here, why should we care ?
Making money using educationnal stuff would be immoral, but using them, and trying to improve them is not.
This is only my newbie opinion  |
|
| i4004 |
| Posted: Mar 27 2004, 10:01 PM |
|
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2432
Member No.: 4935
Joined: 24-June 03
|
and a good one at that....
--------------------
my signature:
|
|
| stephanV |
| Posted: Feb 19 2005, 04:50 PM |
|
|
Spam killer ;)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 4348
Member No.: 8917
Joined: 18-February 04
|
I have revised the list a bit. Basically the major change is that it is now ok to discuss open-source codecs like XviD, x264 and LAME. Linking to builds of the codecs is still disallowed though for obvious reasons. So basically the rules are a little bit loosened... things like x264 are already discussed anyway and this is ok with Avery. It is not our problem how people deal with the patenting issues these codecs have (the reason why linking to builds is still not allowed).
Thanks for attention
--------------------
useful links:
VirtualDub, Input plugins and filters, AviSynth, AVI-Mux GUI, AC3ACM by fcchandler, VirtualDub FAQ |
|
| i4004 |
| Posted: Feb 19 2005, 05:23 PM |
|
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2432
Member No.: 4935
Joined: 24-June 03
|
if we were allowed to discuss legal encoders only, we almost wouldn't have anything to discuss.
and when i'm talking about divx3 you just imagine i'm saying "mpeg4v2", as i never really could see any difference between the two. or i may sugarcoat it by saying "nandub"?
--------------------
my signature:
|
|
