Monday, October 17, 2005, 9:59:14 PM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen wrote: > Not really an argument to use MP4. All the Cool Shit(tm) will certainly > never be used if the format is phased out. Wince we are at the cutting > edge, working on making Cool Shit easier and/or promote it is what we > should do.
I'm really hoping nobody takes the following as a jab. I'm not really a quicktime user - I don't use it at all beyond starting up the QT player when I find a mov that VLC won't open - but I don't have any axe to grind. However, there's something about this that plain puzzles me. I know that there are several people on this list who sometimes use these "advanced" QT features (for me, anything beyond a mov containing one video and one audio stream, playing unadorned, counts as advanced). I'm hoping that someone will be able to answer. The advanced QT features that I have encountered so far seem a strange and ad-hoc bunch - features added seemingly as the whim of the developers took them. For example, interactivity in QT movies seems little more than a toy - I've not yet seen an example even as capable as the "games" on a typical Disney DVD. Is there even a spec for all this stuff that a third-party player manufacturer could use to make sure the player works with *all* QT files? Quicktime is certainly not the ultra simple "video format" that we desperately need for videoblogging to take off (a.k.a "the MP3 of video"). That would need at least to completely pin down the choice of codecs and define rigorous but expandable metatdata - to make it so that all files of the same "file type" play the same on all devices. Neither does Quicktime seem the ultimate interactive downloadable application platform. From what I've seen, creating the same kind of mouseover-triggered alternate-play thingies that appear here from time to time is both easier and better supported with tools in Flash, and Flash offers a huge array of extra features including a "proper" programming language built in. Whenever I've wanted to put interactive content on the web, Flash has seemed the natural choice. So what _is_ the attraction of Quicktime? Please remember - I'm not trolling here. I'm genuinely interested in the answer. -- Frank Carver http://www.makevideo.org.uk ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get Bzzzy! (real tools to help you find a job). Welcome to the Sweet Life. http://us.click.yahoo.com/A77XvD/vlQLAA/TtwFAA/lBLqlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
