• 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.

When is Quicktime 7 coming for Windows?

B

beer

Lifer
Anyone got a clue? The compression ratios are INSANE. Sweet sweet motion compensation, oh how you get me going, baby
 
I can't even BEGIN to imagine the algorithms required. I had a bitch of a time even UNDERSTANDING interframe motion compensation, and H.264 is supposed to compress all motion objects invidually, with varying compression ratios. I don't think you'll be seeing an alternative viewer for a LONG time.
 
Originally posted by: beer
I can't even BEGIN to imagine the algorithms required. I had a bitch of a time even UNDERSTANDING interframe motion compensation, and H.264 is supposed to compress all motion objects invidually, with varying compression ratios. I don't think you'll be seeing an alternative viewer for a LONG time.
Click to expand...

If the internet can come up with beastiality, it can come up with a dynamic compression wrapper reader
 
Originally posted by: arod
i prefer uncompressed ts files to any compression 🙂
Click to expand...

Great, keep an uncompressed HD video signal and let me know how well that works for you. It's about 5 gigabits per second uncompressed.
 
Originally posted by: beer
Originally posted by: arod
i prefer uncompressed ts files to any compression 🙂
Click to expand...

Great, keep an uncompressed HD video signal and let me know how well that works for you. It's about 5 gigabits per second uncompressed.
Click to expand...

<---300GB of HD....100Mbps:Q
 
Originally posted by: UNCjigga
Will this become the new preferred format for .torrents?
Click to expand...

From what I've seen on a powerbook, the videos are EXTREMELY computational intensive to decode. I kid you not, my friend's 867 MHz G4 powerbook got about 5 frames per second on an HD signal. I can't really imagine many PCs, when QT is ported over to x86, being able to even real-time decode H.264. I'd imagine that encoding it would be extremely time-intensive, it's really a format that we'll have to 'grow into.'
 
Originally posted by: beer
Originally posted by: UNCjigga
Will this become the new preferred format for .torrents?
Click to expand...

From what I've seen on a powerbook, the videos are EXTREMELY computational intensive to decode. I kid you not, my friend's 867 MHz G4 powerbook got about 5 frames per second on an HD signal. I can't really imagine many PCs, when QT is ported over to x86, being able to even real-time decode H.264. I'd imagine that encoding it would be extremely time-intensive, it's really a format that we'll have to 'grow into.'
Click to expand...

this must be some serious shyt!!!
 
Originally posted by: beer
Originally posted by: UNCjigga
Will this become the new preferred format for .torrents?
Click to expand...

From what I've seen on a powerbook, the videos are EXTREMELY computational intensive to decode. I kid you not, my friend's 867 MHz G4 powerbook got about 5 frames per second on an HD signal. I can't really imagine many PCs, when QT is ported over to x86, being able to even real-time decode H.264. I'd imagine that encoding it would be extremely time-intensive, it's really a format that we'll have to 'grow into.'
Click to expand...

It depends on what bitrate and such....
 
Originally posted by: intogamer
Originally posted by: beer
Originally posted by: UNCjigga
Will this become the new preferred format for .torrents?
Click to expand...

From what I've seen on a powerbook, the videos are EXTREMELY computational intensive to decode. I kid you not, my friend's 867 MHz G4 powerbook got about 5 frames per second on an HD signal. I can't really imagine many PCs, when QT is ported over to x86, being able to even real-time decode H.264. I'd imagine that encoding it would be extremely time-intensive, it's really a format that we'll have to 'grow into.'
Click to expand...

this must be some serious shyt!!!
Click to expand...

uh..yeah. THer are clips out on the web but they are few and far between and the quality sucks. No HD to be found. The capacity of the codec is still pretty cool for low-bandwidth high-CPU transfers
 
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: beer
Originally posted by: UNCjigga
Will this become the new preferred format for .torrents?
Click to expand...

From what I've seen on a powerbook, the videos are EXTREMELY computational intensive to decode. I kid you not, my friend's 867 MHz G4 powerbook got about 5 frames per second on an HD signal. I can't really imagine many PCs, when QT is ported over to x86, being able to even real-time decode H.264. I'd imagine that encoding it would be extremely time-intensive, it's really a format that we'll have to 'grow into.'
Click to expand...

It depends on what bitrate and such....
Click to expand...

This was an HD Trailer off apple.com.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top