• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Microsoft sometimes looks like a huge, greedy, unstopable beast that will swallow us all.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< every video provider who only offers windows media

i think it is much more common for people to only offer real media, which is vastly inferior to windows media, or quicktime. damn real to hell! >>



everytrailer i've downloaded from a studio run site is on crappy ass quicktime. explain that!! quicktime might be great for video editing, but it blows for small high quality distribution😛 i want @%# divx trailers.
 


<<

<< every video provider who only offers windows media

i think it is much more common for people to only offer real media, which is vastly inferior to windows media, or quicktime. damn real to hell! >>



everytrailer i've downloaded from a studio run site is on crappy ass quicktime. explain that!! quicktime might be great for video editing, but it blows for small high quality distribution😛 i want @%# divx trailers. >>




i'd be HAPPY if all the stupid sites using real switched to quicktime.
 
never seen a movie trailer site with realplayer recently. just yesterday i downloaded two quicktime minority report and a spiderman trailer from their official sites. needless to say even at the highest quality setting they were pixelated and inferior to divx at same bitrate😛

realplayer is dying i think, generally site sthat still use it i don't miss at all😛
 


<<

<<

<< every video provider who only offers windows media

i think it is much more common for people to only offer real media, which is vastly inferior to windows media, or quicktime. damn real to hell! >>



everytrailer i've downloaded from a studio run site is on crappy ass quicktime. explain that!! quicktime might be great for video editing, but it blows for small high quality distribution😛 i want @%# divx trailers. >>




i'd be HAPPY if all the stupid sites using real switched to quicktime. >>



id be happy if they all switched to wmp.
 


<< never seen a movie trailer site with realplayer recently. just yesterday i downloaded two quicktime minority report and a spiderman trailer from their official sites. needless to say even at the highest quality setting they were pixelated and inferior to divx at same bitrate😛

realplayer is dying i think, generally site sthat still use it i don't miss at all😛 >>




oh yea i dunno about movie trailer sites... i was referring to news companies. stupid real one :disgust:
 


<<

<< every video provider who only offers windows media

i think it is much more common for people to only offer real media, which is vastly inferior to windows media, or quicktime. damn real to hell! >>



everytrailer i've downloaded from a studio run site is on crappy ass quicktime. explain that!! quicktime might be great for video editing, but it blows for small high quality distribution😛 i want @%# divx trailers. >>


rolleye.gif

Quicktime is amazing with the right codec. IMO, Sorenson 3 is better than divx. You need about 1.5x the file size to do it, but it's still better and I prefer it because IMO it doesn't have as many video artifacts. All trailers should stay as quicktime...I have no problem with downloading a excellent quality 640x480 trailer @ 25-30mb.
divx has other uses, this is not one of them.
 
guess its time to call lloyd dogget, kay bailey hutchinson, and phil gramm... damnit...
 
As an ardent Microsoft supporter and software engineer, this sounds like bad news. To me, if this all true, is negates the very principle behind what I value so much, .NET. It seems this mentality is antithetical to their otherwise (semi)open approach. I understand the feelings behind intellectual property on things like file formats, protocols, etc., but inevitably tools will be built that interface with these formats or protocols. Indeed, as many have said, many of their protocol definitions are simply abstracted from otherwise open protocols. Is it right for them to claim ownership?

So, MS designs a framework (.NET) that has an extremely open and extensible means of data representation (XML) for almost every facet of the framework, yet injects the notion of intellectual property into the arms of open-source developers?

Bah. Seems like many of the "powers that be" within MS aren't communicating...
 
Anybody who thinks that the article is announcing a dark future is an idiot.

The article is not predicting the future. It is making an argument to impose stricter controls on the behavior of the twice-convicted monopolist that is Microsoft (such as not being able to file patents, or having to license its patents for free to any freely available software, or so on and so forth). The article is making the argument that the DOJ deal is not nearly enough to repair the irreparable damage that Microsoft has caused to the American economy, and it is also demonstrating how this twice-convicted monpopolist is still engaging in anticompetitive behavior in bad faith, even as it is being tried for the crimes that it has already committed.

Since the nine dissenting states have been allowed to proceed with their case, this article will be of great help to them. It will help them stake a dagger through the dark, evil heart of the twice-convicted monopolist that is Microsoft.

Thank you for reading.
 


<< Anybody who thinks that the article is announcing a dark future is an idiot. >>



Glad we know your opinion on that. I don't think anyone is taking it as an announcement of the future, but it can still be discussed.
 


<<

<<

<< every video provider who only offers windows media

i think it is much more common for people to only offer real media, which is vastly inferior to windows media, or quicktime. damn real to hell! >>



everytrailer i've downloaded from a studio run site is on crappy ass quicktime. explain that!! quicktime might be great for video editing, but it blows for small high quality distribution😛 i want @%# divx trailers. >>


rolleye.gif

Quicktime is amazing with the right codec. IMO, Sorenson 3 is better than divx. You need about 1.5x the file size to do it, but it's still better and I prefer it because IMO it doesn't have as many video artifacts. All trailers should stay as quicktime...I have no problem with downloading a excellent quality 640x480 trailer @ 25-30mb.
divx has other uses, this is not one of them. >>



hey don't roll your eyes at me bud. from both examples of minority report and spiderman, neither were "divx" quality😛 i downloaded the high quality ones fo course. they should atleast give one the option to if you don't feel like streaming cr@p[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img] i think apple lets em use quicktime free so people have to download the damned plugin and get bugged to pay for the full version😛 which frankly isn't convincing since quicktime players are so slow and sluggish compared to mediaplayer.


<< atleast they are american >>



So is Red Hat what's you point ?


it could be worse😉 imagine if microsoft were french! oh dear...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top