Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Martinus on August 13, 2004, 01:00:31 pm

Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Martinus on August 13, 2004, 01:00:31 pm
[color=66ff00]Do people encode or watch anything in Real format?
The quality is bloody terrible, the official player effectively roots itself on your box and there are so many better formats out there.

Can anyone tell me one redeeming feature of it or why it's lasted so long in the face of superior competition?

Rant ends.
[/color]
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Petrarch of the VBB on August 13, 2004, 01:02:06 pm
It's blue. And green.

But that's about it.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Rictor on August 13, 2004, 01:03:10 pm
(http://www2.cambridge.ma-usa.sugarmegs.org/graphics/real-buffering.jpg)
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: ionia23 on August 13, 2004, 01:12:42 pm
RealNetworks = Crap
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Ford Prefect on August 13, 2004, 01:20:58 pm
I use Real Player to manage my digital music; ripping stuff from CDs and putting it on my MP3 player and so-forth. I quite like it, actually.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Flipside on August 13, 2004, 01:23:57 pm
I stopped using Real Player after the whole 'silent spyware' incident.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: demon442 on August 13, 2004, 01:24:52 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Ford Prefect
I use Real Player to manage my digital music; ripping stuff from CDs and putting it on my MP3 player and so-forth. I quite like it, actually.



Burn the heretic!  Then introduce his smoldering corpse to winamp!
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Ford Prefect on August 13, 2004, 01:25:26 pm
Oh, well the computer I use for all my music doesn't have an internet connection, so it's all good.

Heh heh. I'd probably like Winamp too, because I'm really not all that fussy about my media players.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Martinus on August 13, 2004, 01:32:35 pm
[color=66ff00]Winamp 2.91, Gods gift to the mp3 generation (and the  midi, DivX, mpeg, XviD, ogg, avi...).
[/color]
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: demon442 on August 13, 2004, 01:39:06 pm
2.91 is great, a wonderful media player.  And, if they would get all the bugs worked out of 5, the balance of style and dependability would easily make it one of the greatest ever.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: karajorma on August 13, 2004, 01:44:47 pm
What bugs? Never had any problems with 5. Then again all I do it play mp3s with it :)
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: vyper on August 13, 2004, 01:46:55 pm
[q]all the bugs worked out of 5[/q]

Like that registration for pro version button, I mean how did that pass QA? ;)
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Falcon on August 13, 2004, 02:18:21 pm
Winamp all the way! Yeah Winamp is a good player.

What was that saying.......   "Winamp really whoops the Llamas......"
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Ford Prefect on August 13, 2004, 02:28:05 pm
Damnit, the Pro version costs money! wtfz0r?!
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Rictor on August 13, 2004, 02:39:42 pm
*ahem*

Nova....
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Genryu on August 13, 2004, 03:53:27 pm
For those who ***** against Real Player, try to get the RealAlternative codec. It lets you see the Real files without having to install the official player.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: castor on August 13, 2004, 05:05:52 pm
For MP3 playback on Win platform, I use: http://www.foobar2000.org/

Exclusively.

Well okay, Winamp is good, too :)
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Kamikaze on August 13, 2004, 05:49:45 pm
RealPlayer is available on Linux, but I don't use it 'cause there are plenty of much better video players. I use mplayer instead, which can play those real format files.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Martinus on August 14, 2004, 01:40:55 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Genryu
For those who ***** against Real Player, try to get the RealAlternative codec. It lets you see the Real files without having to install the official player.

[color=66ff00]This is exactly what I'm trying to get at, there should be no need for real alternative or any other real media codec.
The whole shebang's a bad idea.
[/color]
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Flipside on August 14, 2004, 01:44:13 pm
It's true you know, DivX is twice the Quality for half the size. I think it's because Real pretends it's so much easier to install in a Website, when, to be honest, I found it a complete pain.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Solatar on August 14, 2004, 02:08:50 pm
I've never had a problem with iTunes, although I don't use it for videos.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Liberator on August 14, 2004, 02:10:34 pm
Real would be better if Broadband were everywhere, but once you get out of reasonably populated areas the service for "Information Age" tech goes out the window.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Flaser on August 14, 2004, 02:13:10 pm
I used to have a lot of stuff in real format.

Back in '98 to '01 there were a lot of content, and DivX was still not the mainstream format.
For the values it showed - I mean the data quantity/quality - it was AWSOME!

Nothing could shrink a video that much, and still produce an enjoyable quality.
However it's not perfect, it's not beatuful, but when you were bleeding with a darn 56k modem at midnight to cut back on tel. cost it was a godsend.

BTW I never moved beyon version 8 - that was a spyware free version when they hadn't bought in to Gates Empire.

There is no reason to use it nowadays, but back than it was different.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Knight Templar on August 14, 2004, 11:36:54 pm
lol @ rictor

...
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Singh on August 15, 2004, 12:28:49 am
*Uses Windows Media Player 9.0 :nervous:

*runs
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Liberator on August 15, 2004, 01:42:02 am
*points at Singh and giggles*
*uses Winamp and Media Player Classic*
*wonders why he can't bind WAV files to the Sound Recorder*
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: vyper on August 15, 2004, 08:48:18 am
http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=23302&category=main

Bubye Real...
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: silverwolf on August 15, 2004, 11:29:53 am
i use both winamp and WMP9 the only thing i don't like about win amp is it takes a little time to load a song on mine. but i usually only use WMP for videos ozzy osbourne music videos anyone?
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Stealth on August 16, 2004, 11:04:40 pm
i don't have real installed, and i never will.  last time i did was at least two years ago.  it sucks.  if it's the only format the video, etc. is available in, then i rather don't watch/listen to it
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: MatthewPapa on August 16, 2004, 11:14:35 pm
REAL ONE player...... REAL SUCKS player. Its a pain because It has spyware and starts up your computer in the system tray unless you tell it not to. Its just worthless...
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: phreak on August 17, 2004, 12:37:47 pm
im asking the same question about quicktime movies as well.
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: Flipside on August 17, 2004, 12:43:03 pm
Yeah, Quicktime has the same problem of placing itself in your startup list etc, and, let's face it, once again there are far better and more efficient movie formats. Admittedly, .mov is slowly fading, it's kinda like .pdf, which is a really annoying format, since it requires an entire piece of software installed on your computer when a Word document would have done the job just as well :(
Title: Why in the hell
Post by: aldo_14 on August 17, 2004, 01:26:10 pm
And why the **** can you not resize a quicktime movie when it plays in a browser window?  I mean, if I wanted my televisual viewing in stamp size mode I'd just really far back from the computer looking down the wrong end of a telescope.