Someone running Windows XP is having problems running the Learning
Center videos, and I'm wondering if anyone here has encountered this
problem before. The videos download correctly and are stored in the
correct Revolution cache folder, so a network problem isn't the reason.
If he
On Oct 21, 2005, at 9:08 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
Someone running Windows XP is having problems running the Learning
Center videos, and I'm wondering if anyone here has encountered
this problem before. The videos download correctly and are stored
in the correct Revolution cache folder, so
Trevor,
please allow me to answer, as i am the one who has problems opening the
videotuts in LearningCenter.
I can open the videos in QuckTimePlayer without a problem.
Matthias
Original Message
Subject: Re: Learning center videos don't play (21-Okt-2005 18:54)
From
Trevor DeVore wrote:
On Oct 21, 2005, at 9:08 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
Someone running Windows XP is having problems running the Learning
Center videos, and I'm wondering if anyone here has encountered this
problem before. The videos download correctly and are stored in the
correct
On Oct 21, 2005, at 11:55 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
Thanks Trevor. But he only installed QT to see if that helped. As I
understand it, the videos should have played via WMP to begin with.
I forgot to mention that he tried installing on a different Windows
machine as well, with the same
Trevor DeVore wrote:
Okay, I didn't realize that on Windows it tries to use Windows Media
Player. Looking at the code for the online viewer I would check that
path where Windows Media Player is installed. The path is hard coded
in the online viewer:
case Win32
put
On Oct 21, 2005, at 1:05 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
Good sleuthing. Let's see what he says. If that's the problem, then
Rev's scripts should probably be revised to account for a missing
executable.
If this is the problem I think it would make sense to change the
RevOnline code to check
Trevor DeVore wrote:
On Oct 21, 2005, at 1:05 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
Good sleuthing. Let's see what he says. If that's the problem, then
Rev's scripts should probably be revised to account for a missing
executable.
If this is the problem I think it would make sense to change the
Better yet, they should be coded so they're not looking for a
required component in a hard-wired place. DUmb.
On Oct 21, 2005, at 1:05 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:
If that's the problem, then Rev's scripts should probably be
revised to account for a missing executable.
Dan Shafer wrote:
Better yet, they should be coded so they're not looking for a required
component in a hard-wired place. DUmb.
The whole business with a specialized codec seems awfully complicated.
I know the codec they're using is cool and all, but it's fairly recent
and it's not like the
On Oct 21, 2005, at 3:49 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Dan Shafer wrote:
Better yet, they should be coded so they're not looking for a
required component in a hard-wired place. DUmb.
The whole business with a specialized codec seems awfully
complicated. I know the codec they're using is
11 matches
Mail list logo
