YOu expressed surprise as to why the Real format hadnt won the format
war, I see the comments from people about the negative sides of real
as being the reasons why it shouldnt be surprising.

Factors that influence videoblogging codec choices include:

Image quality/filesize
Encoding time
Cost/availability of encoder & its integration into existing (& free)
video editing apps
Advice in various videoblogging guides
What percentage of net users have the required player software &
whether it sucks
Compatibility with hardware eg ipod

Additional reasons why Real is very far behind, indeed a minority
format for videoblogging, include:

The already mentioned evils of the player, really puts people off
People associate it with its roots, streaming & protected content on
large media sites
Lack of support for loading/editing/converting real files in quite a
few apps
Generally an unpopular container format, avi on windows and mov on mac
remain prevalent due to historical use, with a movement towards wmv
(also quite unpopular container) and mp4.

I dont really undersatnd why you'd be a fan of real if you are againt
monopolyware. Real is jsut as bad. Why not embrace a format like .mp4
container with mpeg4 video, as it isnt controlled by any one company.
Choice of encoder, choice of player. Just because Aple is doing a lot
of the visible stuff with promoting .mp4, doesnt mean they control it,
eg realplayer can play mpeg4 too if you tell it too.

I guess its probably really the filesize/quality issue that has won
you over? Thats fair enough, just cant avoid the fact that other
people may balance factors differently and so thats why real isnt used
much, it scores poorly on other fronts. 

What bitrate etc are you using to achieve the quality/filesize that
you are happy with in real? I would like to compare it to a few
things, as I am also very much influenced by quality factors.

Cheers

Steve of Elbows
 
--- In [email protected], Michael MARZIO
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Andreas, Happy New Year to you,
> I know that the real PLAYER sucks - I said as much myself in the
part of my message you snipped out. But if you embed your real media
on your web pages, then you don't get any of the crap, and you also
get the most efficient codec. Pop-up blockers limit the damage if you
use their player as a stand-alone. I am not defending these guys, they
really do suck, but I much prefer uploading a small RM file of good
quality than a mov file taking up much more disk space, of the same
video with same quality. And WMV - well, there is a war going on, and
I still prefer alternatives to Windows monopolyware. Also, Apple is
not an innocent by-stander. They do their best to steal the file
associations too, and also insist that their player remains ON TOP
when playing, one thing that the sucky real player people do NOT do.
> 
> Also, if you're using Windows, there are great free tools to get the
real player completely out of the registry in seconds.
> All my users get a tinyurl shortcut directly to the final step for
download page of the sucky free real player. Makes it very easy to find.
> 
> There are no ideal solutions, are there?
> I just went to your site and see that you embed MOVs. Well, if you
EMBED RMs, the result is exactly the same. All the crap you bring up
in your reply only occurs when you use the real player as a standalone.
> 
> Mike Marzio
> www.real-english.com
> 
> 
> 
>  Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 14:34:34 +0100
>   From: "Andreas Haugstrup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: The Best Codec
> On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:03:05 +0100, Michael MARZIO  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My conclusion is that RM files are absolutely the best hands down,
and I  
> > just don't understand why Real Networks or Real Media or whatever  
> > they're called, haven't won the codec war already.
> [SNIP]
> > I'm sure others are interested in keeping file sizes down and
quality  
> > up. Why do I seem to be the only one who has reached this
conclusion in  
> > favor of RM?
> In case you haven't noticed it the Real Player sucks. It's
impossible to  
> find the free player on their website, it's a real drag on slower  
> computers, it installs all kinds of crap and hijacks half the file
types  
> on the computer. Even when you think you've uninstalled the player
you get  
> these pop-ups above the system tray notifying you of "great offers"
and  
> the likes.
> They can have the best codec in the world, but until they make a
player  
> that works *with* the users instead of against the users no one is
going  
> to watch those videos.
> - Andreas
> -- 
> <URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ >
> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
>






 
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/
 



Reply via email to