|
|
Posted by Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media] on 09/22/06 22:56
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 20:38:37 +0100, Spex <No.spam@ta.com> wrote:
>Jukka Aho wrote:
>> Spex wrote:
>>
>>> Seriously, unless the video needs to be embedded in an interactive
>>> application a la Flash I steer towards QT. I like the uncluttered
>>> minimalist footprint of the QT web plugin.
>>
>> The QT plugin, at least in Windows environment, doesn't seem to have a
>> full-screen mode, which is a big, big minus.
>
>You need QT Pro for that.
Not necessarily. The feature was disabled by deafult, not removed.
It's a common discussion on the QT newsgroups *why* Apple feel it
necessary to remove such a basic feature unless paid for - but in any
case you can work round it by providing a .qtl (quicktime link) XML
file to the embedded player, which pops it out to fullscreen mode.
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/QuickTime/QT4WebPage/samplechap/special-11.html
>Don't be a cheap skate just buy QT Pro and our experience will improve
>dramatically. QT Pro is well worth the peanuts it costs to upgrade.
It's true, it's one of the cheaper, better "system updates" available
in terms of what it can do for the price.
>What is flattering is the steps M$ has gone to plagiarise the look of QT
>Player in Vista.
They have ? That's totally news to me dude - the apps look completely
different. Did you turn colour to B&W on your monitor or something ?
>Those web developers are clearly less brainfarted than those fools that
>want to watch full screen video that was originally encoded for a small
>embedded window. You must be a measurebator that likes to observe
>compression artifacts up close and personal.
That also is a good point. Not quite as bad though as the people who
compress at 1mbps for playback of a 320x240 clip because "it's
obviously going to be higher quality, right?" ;-))
Cheers - Neil
------------------------------------------------
Digital Media MVP : 2004-2006
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/mvpfaqs
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|