AW: Flash or Quicktime?
luis at anachreon.co.uk
Fri Feb 15 19:58:41 EST 2008
If you want to stick to a 'movie' format: You could package up the
Theora codecs with your installer (for each OS) but you'd have to
re-encode them for Theora (there's plenty of free apps that will do
this). Theora may be 'new/beta'ish' but has been in solid use in some
large projects for a couple of years.
This will then get QT or WMP and the default Linux player to play the
movies, and you'd still have Rev control over them (via QT and WMP in
their respective 'native' platforms).
I'm concerned with QT installs on Windows, principally due to Windows
Updates breaking QT, which then needs to be patched up with its own updates.
Flip4Mac is a possible alternative install for OS X, but I've found
performance drops severely with two or more simultaneous wmv files
playing, something I don't notice with QT on OS X, even with ten mov
files on the go.
Tiemo Hollmann TB wrote:
> Thank you for your points, Stephen
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com [mailto:use-revolution-
>> bounces at lists.runrev.com] Im Auftrag von Stephen Barncard
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 15. Februar 2008 17:22
>> An: How to use Revolution
>> Betreff: Re: Flash or Quicktime?
>> And another thing to think about: Flash, Real, DIVX, whatever,
>> eventually will complain if the user's system needs an update on the
>> web, and they'll have to download and install something sooner or
>> later. Example: I just installed Leopard 10.5.2, that masssive thing
>> just released by Apple, yet going to a particular site, I got the
>> message to update to the 'latest' version of Flash. I don't think
>> one can always reliably count on the OS to provide these tweezy
>> add-ons without upgrades. People who regularly use video on the web
>> are used to this.
>> Remember all the garbage one had to do to get CNN streaming to work
>> when they started their new free service? It requres Java, FLASH
>> AND Microsoft Media Player and at one point required one to tweak
>> quicktime's plist to get it to work. I'm sure the difficulty in
>> use was due partly to the house of cards lashing of these
>> technologies -- all to force the user to use their stupid imbedded
>> player (and keep them from viewing full screen or open multiple
>> windows (which one could do before with quicktime/wmv paid
>> Native, pure quicktime works really well by itself in its native formats.
>> It's true; Iphones and I pods are expanding the PC use of Quicktime
>> to the point where users accept it as much or more than any other
>> media add-on, such as DIVX.
>> Quicktime has been around since the late 80's, concurrent with the
>> introduction of CD-Roms. It's the oldest, most mature computer media
>> technology that's around, with almost 20 years of development behind
>> Besides, using Quicktime will allow you take advantage of Trevor's
>> excellent and cross-platform Quicktime library!
>>> You could make them as H264 based movies (with AAC sound), either
>>> .MOV or .MP4. Both would play fine via QuickTime, and both can play
>>> in the current Flash player. You could build it now as QuickTime
>>> only, and then change your mind later if you were still worried
>>> about people installing QuickTime.
>>> You know that all people who use iPhones or iPods with their PCs do
>>> have QuickTime installed? Even those with just iTunes do, so the
>>> number of people with QuickTime installed is higher than you might
>>> think. Also, you can include the QuickTime installer on your DVD-ROM.
>> stephen barncard
>> s a n f r a n c i s c o
>> - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> use-revolution mailing list
>> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
More information about the Use-livecode