BlueAdept

I don't know... I believe I could have played mpeg4 in a quicktime file... those original files being the only ones I've seen that my player under Linux couldn't identify.. so I guess to be safe... Plus I doubt anything under windows would figure it out.

Either way, you're an absolute star!.. I looked at the video's with a view to either converting to mpeg4 for size/res... but they are just fine as they are. Many thanks...

PS,
Can you play a .OGM video file.... there's a platform agnostic video format...

BlueAdept

Nope...

I agree with the observation, just not the reasoning...

This is about to get REALLY off topic, so if you're not interested in computers, stop reading now... I should moderate myself into the lounge, but I'm not going to. LOL.

If you're interested, here's my view.

The processor is clearly slower than the current crop of x86 processors, but you may well have observed the performance being higher...

The reason for this is Windows.... it's not the hardware that's cleaner and faster, it's the OS... being as that is the way the computer interacts with you.

I do not use Windows on my PC's for this among other reasons, the most serious of which currently being the monopolistic practices of that particular company... I use Linux, which is a clone of the UNIX operating system... practially identical to the *BSD UNIX recently adopted by Apple to power their OS X system. In essence if you are running OS X, then at the heart of both our MAC and PC computers beats the same OS!.

Indeed, if I had a MAC, I would run Linux on it... one significan't reason why I don't have a MAC laptop now is the 1 button mouse, which doesn't sit well with "X Windows"... the UNIX GUI.

The point is, that the UNIX OS, and to some extent the earlier Apple OS's have been far better at using resources than Windows... and hence you percieve your computer to be faster than a Windows PC of significantly higher spec, as I do... The machine I'm sitting at now would embarase many Windows PC's 10 times the speed... and they do exist since this is a 200Mhz PPro....
My other machine is a 1100Mhz Athlon... and I was demonstrating this to a friend recently, when he said show me it be faster than my PC... it doesn't seem any faster.

I made him use it for a few minutes and he said, no... my PC is faster... the GUI responds slightly faster and moves windows slightly faster..

OK, I said, now... And I started playing MP3's... then his eye's got wide as I put in a CD & and DVD and started ripping both of those those... and encoding to mp3 from the CD... I opened a connection to "NASA TV" on their web site and let that play... as well as opened playback from the file created by the DVD rip, which was still running... and some other stuff... I sat him back at the machine and pointed him at the second screen... now do yr tests again.

The eyes got wider when he told me he could hardly tell the difference in performance of the GUI and browser etc... and you thought windows did multi-tasking I said.

The point is, that no company would buy a PC that slow now, since it's not good enough for the latest versions of Windows.... how come I can use a machine 5 times SLOWER without complaint under Linux... and you indeed see your 750Mhz machine as faster than any (Windows) PC...

To you a MAC is best, because you are familiar with MAC OS... and to some other people PC's are best because they are windows users.... but to me, the hardware is not relavent... I have run Linux on at least 5 different hardware platforms, and honestly, given a screen and keyboard... you would be unlikley to be able to identify the difference... between a MAC, a PC an SGI workstation, a SUN Sparcstation or whatever else I chose... I use the PC architecture typically only because Windows has made rediculously fast hardware so cheap I can get decent machines for free.... I'm getting a dual 300Mhz PII next month for nothing, with hardware raid and disks etc.... simply because it won't run XP properly... Baahahah, it's gonna be an awesome Linux machine.

BlueAdept

Some lower res, and separate versions of the video's are also available... thanks to "Good Duck"...

See the complete list here:-

ftp://rx8:mazda@ftp.fsck.co.uk/highway1/

Digisan

I run Redhat 7.2 on my DEC Alpha and it screams for a 600Mhz chip, then again it is a 64-bit processor, . Linux is cool, too bad I am not a Linux guru, olny a matter of time.

Rob

xmatt

I posted copies of the mpeg conversion movies on that same page as the originals in case you guys have trouble getting into the ftp server. Thanks...

<a href="http://www.hine.cx/etc/rx-8">http://www.hine.cx/etc/rx-8</a>

matt

B-Nez

FYI the original videos were in the Quicktime Uncompressed (DV) format. Unless you have software to edit raw, uncompressed video, you wouldn't have that codec on your system. That is the reason some of you could not play them - regardless of your OS.

visitor

eh....I guess my first post was gonna come sooner or later.

For Dail-up and slow Cable/DSL users:

http://www.dvstuff.net/~brian/rx8.html

login/password: rx8sucks/justkidding

Hopefully this won't kill my bandwidth when I get back tomorrow night.

And for the real freaks, I've got a VCD MPEG of the all 3 videos for you to burn onto a CD for hours of enjoyment via DVD

BlueAdept

Hmm... under Linux my player picked the Sony DV codec... but still failed to play!.. Oh well.

visitor

Actually, the new Pentium 4 3.06ghz CPU with Hyperthreading smokes the fastest Apple (Dual 1.8) in every application (Adobe Whatever) that the Apple is normally best at. So as far as computing power goes, Apple once again, falls behind. On top of that, it's cheaper to have a fully loaded P4 than a Dual 1.8 Mac. Either way, Mac's are still neat machines and it's nice that they've stepped into the world of modern os's.

The funny thing about Quicktime 5 and Quicktime 6 is that they're based on the same idea as DivX, which is MPEG 4, though DivX is based on a hacked Windows Media codec which is also based on MPEG 4. So it's not completely proprietary Apple even offers a free streaming server for Quicktime which I think is totally sweet.

Most OS's that have firewire drivers should be able to play back the QT file. This wouldn't include Win9x and probably Linux. I don't think the Sony DV Codec for Linux is compatible with the one that the QT files were done with. Sony's DV Codec isn't exactly OHCI compliant. They've got their own little thing going on while most everyone else either uses the TI DV Codec or Microsoft's DV Codec which are both OHCI compliant. And as far as QT6 files being played on Linux, I don't think that that's gonna happen unless if someone somehow ported the Sorenson Video 3 Codec for Linux, the main codec used for QT 5 and 6. Using anything other than Sorenson Video looks ugly.

B-Nez

That is too funny...I am working on something similar. I'm taking all of the videos I have so far, some photos, and some music to make an XSVCD for enjoyment on my set.

Aeterna

Maybe I'm just stupid, but this worked for me and my WindowsXP:

Right click on '.mpg' and "Save Target As" Maybe the problem is more complex than that, but just tryin to be helpful:D