RE: [videoblogging] Re: mov in to wmv

Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:04:02 -0800

And don’t leave us over here at DivX out either. We have some things cooking back in the lab. First small trickles will probably reach public beta in the next month.

 

We might not have the money that the other guys have, but we already beat everyone’s expectations in the DVD market.

 

Jim

DivX

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of robert a/k/a r
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 1:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: mov in to wmv

 

Andrew, I wouldn't discount Flash.

 

IMHO the quality of this VideoEgg file is quite good, have a look:

 

http://www.thomasblard.com/thomasblard/2005/11/arroseur_arrose.html

 

the tinyurl is:

http://tinyurl.com/822zr

 

cheers

r

 

--

<URL: http://r.24x7.com >

Deconstructing the status quo, collaboratively




On Nov 17, 2005, at 3:40 PM, andrew michael baron wrote:

 

With all of my rejection of .wmv files combined with my hopes for a

single CODEC, I have learned that the number one reason to

provide .wmv files is for people who do not have the authority to

install on their machines.

 

Many people at work do not have access to install. Also people in

lesser developed countries often sit at cyber cafes and can not

install software from there either.

 

Most of these people are on Windows and can by default play .wmv files.

 

Its a lesser option, but often the only option.

 



SPONSORED LINKS
Individual Fireant Use

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to