Questions for Mac user

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by Deco_time, Jul 3, 2004.

  1. Deco_time

    Deco_time Guest

    I don't know the first thing about Macintosh computer. Can video encoded
    in wmv9 be viewed on a Mac? If so, is it easy to setup or is it
    complicated? If not, what would be the prefered codec to use? We're
    talking convenience, so peoples don't have to go hunting for codec on
    some obscur website, as well as a good file size/quality ratio, and that
    I don't mind hosting both a mov file as well as wmv.
    Thank you.
    Deco_time, Jul 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Microsoft distribute (free) Windows Media players for
    OS 8, 9 and X.
    It would appear to be as easy to install on a Mac as it is
    on a PC (or as easy as QuickTime is to install on a PC).
    It is trivial to provide a link with a nice button, etc. For
    I just read a remarkable claim about quality vs. size for WMV
    on one of these newsgroups just a day or two ago, but now I
    can't find it.
    If you have more Mac viewers, it may be more convienent
    for them to make mov (QT) available for those that haven't
    installed WMP.
    Richard Crowley, Jul 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Duh, it is right there....
    Richard Crowley, Jul 3, 2004
  4. Deco_time

    Deco_time Guest

    Yes, I already use wmv; It's on the Mac side that I don't know what
    codec to use if I was to host QT file. I already tried with Sorenson
    codec, the video itself was ok but the sound was awfull, probably wrong
    setting on my part.
    I think I'll go ahead with your suggestion of providing a link to WMP
    for Mac which you graciously provided and go from there. I'll deal with
    the Mac codec issue if/when I get request for it.
    Thank you.
    Deco_time, Jul 3, 2004
  5. Greetings Deco_time,

    I would definitely use the .mov (Quicktime) for the Mac people.

    But, I have a question. Are you providing a "embedded" video or a
    "stand-alone" video. Otherwise, is the video going to be embedded into
    the web page, or are you just doing a link where you download it, and it
    launches the player?

    Richard Ragon, Jul 3, 2004
  6. Deco_time

    Deco_time Guest

    I don't like embedded video, too restrictive; I figured others might
    feel the same, so I'm simply providing a link to the file and peoples
    can use the viewer they want and resize it as they see fit, like on the
    Odysea homepage.
    But why, would that have an incidence on the choice of codec for the Mac
    Deco_time, Jul 3, 2004
  7. What exactly do you mean by restrictive? Just curious?

    I might be wrong but with windows media file.. don't you have to
    download the entire movie first, then your OS associates it with the
    player.. After you have to wait for the entire download, then windows
    media will open and then play?? For broad band users this is no big
    deal, but for dial-up clients this can be awful as there is no feedback
    as to what's going on.

    With WM there's no indication of streaming, unlike Quicktime where it
    opens QT player on the webpage or application, and you can view your
    video while it's downloading at the same time..

    Don't get me wrong.. windows media is awesome on Mac and Pc. Just that
    QT seams to be better at "streaming".


    I recently put up a site for a trailer for a movie that I'm working on
    called "Earls Your Uncle". You can view the trailer here:

    I used Quicktime because there never seams to be any problems with
    people viewing the content. I created this trailer, and the production
    company released the URL 2 weeks ago to over 400 people involved with
    the movie or around the movie. Not one person came back and said it
    doesn't work for them. Plus, Apple is claiming QuickTime 6 has reached
    175 million downloads in recent months here. I don't know what that
    translates to in market penetration though. I was totally expecting
    someone coming back and saying they couldn't view the trailer.. these
    were not the most techno people.. but no one ever did, and at the
    premiere of the movie, everyone was talking about the trailer.. It was
    kind of a personal project to see a ratio of people that couldn't see it
    vs. people that could.. After the first week, I said to myself, that
    was awesome.. low tech support.

    I think Sorenson 3 is the most popular for video. I would have used
    QMusic for audio, but I don't have the pro version of QMusic so I mostly
    go with IMA.

    Side note here.. I think that the market penetration for QT6 is now
    pretty good.. And Im thinking of using MPEG-4 with AAC audio in future
    projects now because this is 'new' in QT6, but not in QT5. using
    mpeg-4/AAC is superior to Sorenson in video, and it's about the same
    size in the download.

    Also.. this might help you out:

    It's actually a tutorial on publishing QT movies made for the web though
    Final Cut Pro, however, its got some good hints on all the settings
    needed for making nice small good quality files.

    Hope this all helps you out.

    Richard Ragon, Jul 4, 2004
  8. Deco_time

    Ty Ford Guest

    Bingo! I'm not sure if it was due to the windows media player, but my Mac
    developed some strange locking up habits a short time ago. After weeding the
    files, including removing windows media player 7, the problem stopped.

    Not an indictment, just an observation.


    Ty Ford

    -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
    stuff are at
    Ty Ford, Jul 4, 2004
  9. Deco_time

    Deco_time Guest

    Well, when the video is embedded, you can't resize the viewing window
    and you can't move it. When it opens in WMP, I can resize it the way I
    want and move it to the side and keep doing other things while the video
    is playing; for me it just seems more convenient.
    I have the exact opposit problem. With QT files, unless embedded, the
    video won't start until it's finished downbloading with no input of
    what's going on except the light on the DSL modem flashing to indicate
    that I'm recieving data. With WMV on the other hand, the player opens as
    soon as the link is clicked and start to play as soon as there is enough
    data in the buffer. Probably a Mac/Window thing, but I'm glad to know
    that WMV streaming doesn't work well on Mac computers.
    See my answer above, I think this is mostly platform dependent.
    I just tried IMA; from the result I got, and the trailer on your
    website, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it. You think AAC
    would be better?
    Very good link.
    Everything I wanted to know, thank you.
    Deco_time, Jul 4, 2004
  10. Deco_time

    Deco_time Guest

    What do you use to view WMV file? Or do you just pass if no other option
    is available?
    Deco_time, Jul 4, 2004
  11. Fair enough. This can be done in Quicktime too though..

    Probably encoded incorrectly maybe?
    IMA has been around for a while, AAC mpeg-4 is new. However IMA is
    something like 4:1 compression, and ACC is something like 10:1. they
    sound the same, but the file size is much less on AAC.. which I love.

    Also.. just a side note again:

    If you watch that Apple Keynote, mostly bullshit stuff (except the new
    30 inch apple monitors!!), Steve Jobs talks briefly about a new CODEC
    called H.264. H.264 is open standard, and scalable. Its going to be
    used in the next generation DVDs, and the same codec can be used in
    embedded movies on your web page!

    The future in web video looks great if you ask me!

    Richard Ragon, Jul 4, 2004
  12. Deco_time

    Bill Davis Guest

    Charles post represents a good and useful look at what WMP "does" do,
    however, like most marketing source materials it kinda ignores what it
    doesn't do.

    One example - the Mac implementation of Windows Media Player- including
    version 9 will NOT decode and play some of the most recent versions of
    Windows for the PC encoded videos.

    I've had "Hardware License Inconsistant" errors appear on trying to play
    recent movies encoded on a PC when trying to play them back on my Mac even
    tho the Mac' automatic Software Update - and my subscription to Version
    Tracker - keeps that Mac day by day current on codecs and other video
    processing enablers.

    Essentially, that MS telling me that since I didn't choose THEIR hardware
    - I can't play a particular file.

    This, of course, is Microsoft's right. They "own the ball" and they can
    allow or withhold such permission as they like.

    But it's a good example of their typical approach to business. Choose us
    or we'll make things difficult for you.

    Microsoft does a lot of basic stuff very well - as their success indicates.

    Sharing ideas and encouraging a competiative marketplace where the best
    implementation of the best ideas are rewarded, regardless of their source,
    is, clearly, NOT one of them.

    Too bad.
    Bill Davis, Jul 4, 2004
  13. Try the newer Windows Media Player 9.
    Charles Tomaras, Jul 4, 2004
  14. Bill, the only real incompatibilities stem from lack of the most recent DRM
    model support on the Mac version. I've just recently been named a Microsoft
    MVP in Windows Media and would love for you to send me a link to the problem
    files you talk about so I can take a look and forward them to the rest of
    the MVP community for comment. There is a lot of poor encoding taking place
    by people who don't understand the implications of the myriad of encoding
    properties that can be checked or unchecked with various encoders. One only
    has to look at the difficulties amateurs have with DVD authoring to see how
    seemingly innocuous settings and check boxes can affect the playability of a
    disc and a wide variety of hardware. The Windows Media Player for Mac group
    at Microsoft are a hard working bunch who's goal is to create a great Mac
    player that will function flawlessly. To accuse them of purposefully making
    an incompatible player to lure people to the Windows platform is not
    consistent with my knowledge of their efforts. If anything, they held back
    releasing a 9 series Mac player till they got it right. It would have made
    greater strategic sense to release the 9 series player lock and step with
    the Windows version which would have given them a 6 month lead on the
    introduction of iTunes for Mac and would have also allowed content creators
    with a Mac audience the ability to use the 9 series codecs without issue.
    Instead they took their time and gave it their best. DRM issues aside, the
    feedback from my Mac friends has been positive in that the OSX player is
    streamlined and easy to use and does not try to be a resource hogging "do
    everything" to digital media.

    Charles Tomaras
    Seattle, WA
    Charles Tomaras, Jul 5, 2004
  15. Great to hear Charles! I personally like the windows media player on my
    Mac.. However, I have to admit that I think the WMP on windows is
    superior though...

    Interesting enough.. the exact reverse for Quicktime player. QT player
    is far superior on the Mac platform than windows.. they both essential
    do the same thing, but could they have made the windows version of
    Quicktime any more "ugly"?? The mac version has a beautiful skin, and
    nice aqua buttons, while the windows QT buttons looks gaud awful, and
    the QT icons in your task bar are appalling!! I actually wrote to apple
    and asked why the gaud awful windows icons in this day and age of 32-bit
    icons with alpha support? They wrote me back with some bull email. Off
    topic sorry..

    Anyway.. Why does the Windows Media player on Mac look so different to
    it's counterpart windows version?

    And, while were on this subject.. Can I throw in some request? Make the
    Mac windows player play DVD's to replace Apples sucky built in DVD
    player. Add in de-interlace, DTS/DD 5.1 playback, and full screen mode,
    and I would kiss you!! :)

    Richard Ragon, Jul 5, 2004
  16. Deco_time

    Bill Davis Guest

    Well Charles, perhaps.

    But then I've got to suggest that the very LEAST thing they need to do is
    revise their own error message wording.

    When you try and play a file and you get "Hardware License Inconsistent?
    What would ANYONE with even rudimentary analytical skills think?

    Are you telling me that nobody would figure out how to splash a screen
    with "DRM error - failed in playback attempt" or any of a HUNDRED other
    wordings - which would, if you're correct, have the advantage of being A)
    true (if so) and B) wouldn't have people asking why WMP isn't supporting
    their particular hardware configuration?

    When the COMPANY tells me that my"hardware LICENSE is inconsistent" with
    playing a file. (my emphasis on the LICENSE) What exactly SHOULD I think?
    But that someone CHOSE to not only require a "hardware license", but to
    also restrict access to those not running the "right" hardware?

    Yes, The latest Movie Player will play many WMV files.

    But sorry, in my experience, NOT all.

    The truth is that that WARNING does exits in WMP 9. And to the extent it
    communicates with the public, it clearly says - "if you were running
    different hardware, you COULD run this file."

    What other reading of this could there be?

    Am I missing something.
    Bill Davis, Jul 5, 2004
  17. I will forward your comments to whoever I can find appropriate and ask that
    you take one moment to do so yourself at the following page: (assuming it
    opens for you!)

    Charles Tomaras, Jul 5, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.