| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
T2: Extreme Edition DVD includes HD Windows Media version | |
|
||
| Time: 18:35 EST/23:35 GMT | News Source: IGN | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
The final specs for Artisan's upcoming re-re-release of Terminator 2: Judgment Day arrived and they confirmed a long-running rumor that the DVD would include a high-definition version of the film using a Microsoft Windows Media Player 9 file. This may sound strange to you, but it is actually quite cool. Microsoft has developed a low-bitrate HD compression codec that is just now being experimented with on some Artisan DVDs. It allows high-def quality video on the same amount of disc space as a regular single-layer DVD. Artisan's Standing in the Shadows of Motown includes a Windows Media Player 9 version of the film in high-def on disc two. Not only does it look incredible; it only takes up about 3 gigs on the disc. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 310 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:22:31 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 4/11/2003 8:46:15 PM |
|
Windows Media 9 Series is clearly the best media platform available right now.
Yet companies continue to insist on using Quicktime and Real, both of which are, quite simply, a joke when compared to WM9. The most anoying example of this is the release of the Matrix Reloaded trailer (which was AWESOME by the way) in Quicktime format. Can't stream it. Can barely watch it! (The 1000x5** version was VERY slow even on a 2Ghz PC and a 1Ghz Mac). You can't even make it full screen! Sigh.... This post was edited by RMD on Sunday, April 13, 2003 at 01:52. |
| #2 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 4/11/2003 8:51:40 PM |
|
It was seamless on my 1.8 GHz P4, and just as good on my 400 Mhz G3... And I watched it full screen.
Too bad for you... |
| #3 By 2459 (24.170.151.19) at 4/11/2003 10:06:14 PM |
|
"This is exactly the reason why the reigning standards are generally those from technology groups that do not dabble in other waters"
Check MPEG and the DVD Forum and you'll see that all of the companies "dabble in other waters". RE: Your problems with ASF/WMV9, Apple and others can always license the format and implement it. It's even cheaper than MPEG2/MPEG4. Also, Apple doesn't make Quicktime the most accessible format on the PC either. No DirectShow codec = no cross app compatability. As far as quality goes, I'd say that the MPEG-4-based QuickTime 6 gives WM9 a bigger run for its money than most give it credit for." Quicktime 6 suffers from the same inanimate object, dancing pixel syndrome as MPEG4. WM9 also beats it in the quality to compression ratio. And yes, you can watch full-screen video. It's called QuickTime Pro. :p Yes. Apple is probably the only company that charges you just for full-screen playback. |
| #4 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 4/11/2003 10:11:26 PM |
|
jerky boy - "It was seamless on my 1.8 GHz P4, and just as good on my 400 Mhz G3... And I watched it full screen. "
Sure, after you spend 30 minutes downloading it because the bandwidth requirements are too high to stream the content even over a 1Mbps line. ssfreitas - Quicktime is ok. WMP9 is really bloody cool. |
| #5 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 4/11/2003 11:13:34 PM |
|
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wm9series.asp
Nough said. |
| #6 By 2459 (24.170.151.19) at 4/11/2003 11:48:25 PM |
|
Since when did MS have a monopoly on "operating system software"? There are plenty of vendors to chose from for this market. The only market their monopoly claim extends to is PC client OSes. Even here, the market is driven by the consumer. They are free to change at any time. Same deal with consoles, though I offer Sony for parity here (an MPEG-LA licensor).
Blame the "competition" for lack of adequate competition in any of these areas. When a company has a much power as Microsoft, it should not be allowed to bully the way it does. Funny how currently Apple is a bigger bully than MS. You'd think with their small marketshare, they would not want to upset the few partners they have, but somehow Apple (or Steve Jobs) thinks that their partners need them more than they need their partners. They've even succeeded in alienating many of their resellers. BTW, so far, the MPEG-LA has thrived off of the absolute lack of competition in the market. Their formats are not free. Now that there is competition, everyone gets scared at the thought of competing. "And I for some reason have trouble believing it'd be cheaper than MPEG was." Windows Media 9 Series is as little as half the licensing cost of MPEG4. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/create/licensing.aspx#link3 And there are no per-stream, audience, budget, or time fees on produced content. This post was edited by n4cer on Friday, April 11, 2003 at 23:50. |
| #7 By 2459 (24.170.151.19) at 4/12/2003 1:15:51 AM |
|
"There are no real alternatives now that Microsoft's marketshare has been entrenched as far as it has, Apple's reputation has diminished as greatly as it has, and Linux's ease of use has, well, stayed almost entirely the same."
These are all fixable things. There is a lack of drive and focus among the competition. This is their fault, not Microsoft's. "No one wants to compete, because they KNOW their efforts will be entirely useless. How can you not consider Mac OS X "adequate competition"? Since its (admittedly premature) release, Apple's marketshare has LESSENED. The reason you don't see real companies even attempting a crack at Office (outside of hokey GNU OpenOffice crap) is because they know they can't succeed. With this attitude, the competition will never succeed. How can they know it's entirely useless without putting forth any real effort. Most of the competitors don't even try to make changes to their strategy to try and gain more users: How long will Apple have a one-button mouse and price themselves out of the majority of the market? How long will the Linux community create several methods of doing the same thing and demand everyone give away code rather than sell a product? There is a lot more wrong with the competition's strategies, but in either case, having a can't-win attitude from the start is no way to be competitive. OS X: How many times is Apple going to charge for an OS before they achieve feature parity with NT? I guarentee Longhorn won't have this problem. Contrarily, when your marketshare is so low, you need to maximize profits, and unfortunately, by the time the reseller puts the dollar in his pocket, there isn't much left. Apple's resellers didn't leave due to profits (or lack thereof), they left because Apple tried to have them basically sign away their rights to legal recourse in the event of a dispute. Apple also has a history of treating their resellers like crap in terms of the hardware repair/return process. "And I stand corrected on the licensing cost. Of course, to even provide this content, one assumes you'll need to be running Windows. In which case, we haven't solved a damn thing, now, have we?" You do not have to assume this. Soon, there will be DVD players and portable devices capable of 9 Series video playback. A Mac version of the player is coming, but takes longer to implement because they need to implement the DRM subsystem on the Mac. *n*x users can already play Windows Media sans DRM content, and again, anyone can license the codecs for their respective OS/device for less than the cost of MPEG. |
| #8 By 12071 (203.217.70.238) at 4/12/2003 1:32:21 AM |
| #1 The 1000xYYY version played fine on my P3-866 at work... not quite sure why a 2Gig machine was having problems! But yes, Quicktime does require a lot of processing when it gets to higher res. As for pointing to a windows site to prove how good WM9 is... you may as well have pointed to microsoft.com or if that's a bit obvious then a company that was sponsored by Microsoft to do the comparison. (Note: that isn't to say that WM9 isn't superior to both Real and Quicktime, which it is, but there are a couple of free codecs which do equally as well - better in some areas - worse in others.) |
| #9 By 61 (65.32.171.144) at 4/12/2003 4:19:05 PM |
|
I watched the trailer at the max resolution (streamed) just fine... well, if you want to it streamed.
QT starts downloading it and you can watch the downloaded parts. |
| #10 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 4/13/2003 1:52:08 AM |
| I suspect the reason the P4 2Ghz ran the trailer slowly was because the video card (well... can't really call it a "card"... more like a chip) is as cheap as it can get. (It was my work machine... no games at work. :-) |
| #11 By 3 (62.253.128.7) at 4/13/2003 4:37:32 PM |
| #15 - that makes two of us. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 310 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:22:31 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
