Cheers for the info. My fear is that what plays through media center is not exactly the same as what can be made to play through windows media player. I have sucessfully watched mp4 through windows media player, by installing a codec, and back in the days where I was always ranting about mpeg4 & h264, I hoped that there would be plenty of less obscure ways that people could watch mp4's without quicktime or VLC, on windows. This was part of my call for people to consider using .mp4 not .mov and to get away from the idea that .mp4 is an Apple or quicktime specific format. In the end the player & encoder that comes with nero burning rom suite of software proved to be a good alternative, but thats going way off topic as its nothing to dow ith media center or media player.
So, need to check whether you can actually play all formats you have directshow codecs for, in media center, and that its not limited by file extension or something. Certainly I wouldnt expect the media xtender part of the xbox360 to be able to handle anything other than wmv, which is where the M$ solution starts to stink for me. I share your opinion on the Apple TV, I think its one of Apple's riskiest products in the last few years, but it did seem like a good fit with all the video theyve started selling on itunes. I think I was underimpressed with its maximum resolution, considering the emerging HD age, and I cant see it selling in huge numbers like ipods do. It either needs to do more, or cost less. Wit their current design they probably cant make it all that much cheaper, so it will remain on the fringes to a certain extent, or maybe not and I am soooo wrong. Im glad they are giving it a try anyway. Meanwhile I think microsoft have been trying to get onto set-top-boxes connected to televisions for very many years. Think they probably had trouble finding enough partners, getting the price right etc. There must be something good about media center PC's because I know a few people that use them, but I think Microsoft hoped in the past to conqeur this market from a different direction. Most Media Centers are being bought as new PC's with that capability, coming with the TV card and the remote and that version of Windows, and which traditionally were at the more expensive end of the PC market. Costs seem to have dropped and the software improved over the years, so now there are sub £400 media center PC's, so maybe it will catch on more. Plus Media Center stuff is included with some versions of Vista, so more people might build their own. I wonder how the range of purchasable video content that has DRM compatible with media center, compares to the apple tv. As I worry about the energy outlook in the future, I suppose I should factor that into my thinking. So I should not like solutions that require a PC to be on somewhere else at the same time to stream content to the extender. I guess the ipod would class as about as low powered a device as you can get to give a reasonable TV video watching experience, although these issues are rather overshadowed by the large wattage of many of todays large televisions. So maybe I shouldnt be trying to watch stuff on a big screen at all if I care that much! Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 15 Mar 2007, at 18:34, Steve Watkins wrote: > > "So anyways Im interested in Ruperts opinions of the Windows Media > > Center thang, why he thinks it is right. I havent tried it much but I > > was under the impression it was mostly compatible with wmv,a nd > > whatever microsofts format is for recording digital tv. So I assumed > > media of other formats has to be converted to be watched, which is an > > instant turnoff for me. Have I got this detail all wrong?" > > Steve, > MS doesn't provide support out of the box, because they're evil > bastards, but Windows Media Player will play MP4 if you download a > decoder pack. So it's a relatively small hack. This is from the > Windows Media Player multimedia file formats support page: > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316992#34 > "Windows Media Player does not support the playback of the .mp4 file > format. You can play back .mp4 media files in Windows Media Player > when you install DirectShow-compatible MPEG-4 decoder packs. > DirectShow-compatible MPEG-4 decoder packs include the Ligos LSX-MPEG > Player and the EnvivioTV." > http://www.ligos.com (http://www.ligos.com) > http://www.envivio.com/products/ > > But no Quicktime, of course, under any circumstances, ever. Which is > a drag. What's wrong with these people? Why can't they all just > hold hands and be friends. If we all held hands, no one would be > able to make a fist. > > I'm interested in my opinion, too :-) -- I haven't actually used WM > Center yet, but the way I look at it, this is what the public will > use if they use anything, so I'm intrigued... and I think Apple have > shot themselves in the foot by not integrating TV and Hard disk > recording. EyeTV is not integral to Front Row - you have to buy and > install separately, and from the sound of the reviews of the latest > version, it's a pain to use the remote to switch back between EyeTV > and Front Row. Idiocy. > Plus, WMC seems to make it easier to play one thing through your TV > while using your PC as usual on your monitor. Whereas a Mac Mini or > iMac solution is a dedicated media machine. Another attraction for > the general non-techie public. > As you say, comparing Apple TV and WMC is not like for like - but it > was a golden opportunity for Apple. Who REALLY wants a box for > hundreds of pounds that only lets them play their iTunes music and > videos through their TV...? It's a gadget, not a utility. Comparing > the Windows Media Center extender with the Apple TV, you seem to get > almost full WMC functionality through the extender, even if it's an > XBOX360 (which is useful in its own right). I don't know... I just > don't *get* Apple TV - but I'm probably wrong. > > I have to say - I never thought I'd be advocating Microsoft in an > online forum, particularly one devoted to media. Where did it all go > wrong? I worked at MTV a few years ago, and the head of advertising > had a poster of a blue-eyed blonde teenager on his wall, with a man > in a suit standing on her shoulder and climbing into her ear. The > caption was "The MTV Generation: Get Inside Their Heads". Dark > days. But I think that's what I want to do - get inside the heads of > those people who will be starting to use V.o.D. on their couches, and > WMC is the way that I think it might go. I want to see if it's > possible to set it up in a way that my wife will like using it, the > way she loves Sky+. A funny kind of inverse early-adopting. > > Rupert > http://www.fatgirlinohio.org > http://www.crowdabout.us/fatgirlinohio/myshow/ > > > > > On 15 Mar 2007, at 18:34, Steve Watkins wrote: > > So anyways Im interested in Ruperts opinions of the Windows Media > Center thang, why he thinks it is right. I havent tried it much but I > was under the impression it was mostly compatible with wmv,a nd > whatever microsofts format is for recording digital tv. So I assumed > media of other formats has to be converted to be watched, which is an > instant turnoff for me. Have I got this detail all wrong? > > I dont think a comparison between a computer with windows media center > on it, and Apple TV, is comparing like for like. The equivalent Apple > thing would be a full mac computer (eg mac mini) with front-row on it, > and the Apple TV is more like what Microsoft promote as 'windows media > center extenders'. These are devices such as the Xbox360 that are > connected to the TV and can play media that is stored on the Windows > Media Center computer, via network. Although I think they need to > stream it live, wheras the Apple TV has a hard drive? > > Still at the end of the day personally it comes back to how loud the > hardware is, and what formats it can support. As I got on quite well > with eyeTV for recording, id probably get a mac mini, use eye-tv, > itunes & frontrow on it, and then use VLC to support more formats. > Granted this is still too fiddley as only frontrow really has the > right UI designed for distance TV use, but even if I went for a PC > solution I think Id end up looking for 3rd party stuff I guess, to > deal with format issues. Remote control is another issue, I think I > prefer Apples simplistic approach, although it has limitations. Been > experimenting with getting Wii remote to work with computers, seems > more stable & flexible on PC than Mac at the moment unfortunately, but > really enhances the possibilities of what interaction if feasible from > a distance with a remote, great stuff, and makes a full-blown computer > with net surfing etc as well as media playback, an attractive thing to > connect to a tv. Its a shame the Wii itself doesnt handle a wider > range of media and have some nice storage options, as its dead quiet, > probably doesnt use too much power, is small and the remote rocks. The > web browser for it is interesting and the news/weather aggregators are > very nice ways to interact with & watch data from a distance. Youtube > works on it (flash 7 in browser) but thats about the only commonly > used vlog format I think I can watch on the Wii. > > Cheers > > Steve Elbows > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <rupert@> wrote: > > > > Randy, > > I'm a Mac fan and have both PC & Macs (PowerPC G4 x2). One of my > > many freelancing jobs is helping people sort out their computer > > problems. I don't think the PC is a slowly dying dinosaur. PCs are > > here to stay because people like what they know. You could look at > > Mac's transition to Intel as a slow convergence towards a world of > > oneness where both exist together in a compatible PC world. Macs > > are now really just smart-looking high-spec PCs, with a slightly > > different OS. Vista has learnt from and copied OS X in its > > appearance and functionality. The next computer I'm going to buy > > is not a Mac - I've had too many hard drive failures on my G4s and my > > iPod to love Apple hardware any more. It's all about features. I > > have all the design and editing software I need on Mac already, but > > what I want from PC is Windows Media Center - integrated TV, HDR, > > Video on demand, Podcasting, RSS, Music, blah blah blah. This is > > traditional Mac territory, but Vista has done it better this time. > > Apple TV is seriously short on features. > > > > Rupert > > http://www.fatgirlinohio.org > > http://www.crowdabout.us/fatgirlinohio/myshow/ > > > > > > > > > > On 15 Mar 2007, at 17:39, humancloner1997 wrote: > > > > Daryl, you mention that you would also have "pc accessability" while > > working with flash. Would the new Mac with the Intel chip that can > > run Windows qualify as "pc accessability". > > I'm planning on buying a second computer. I considered a good pc but > > then decided the new Mac with the Intel chip would work just as > > well. I edit with iMovie but like programs like Microsoft Word in > > the PC. However, since switching to Mac, I view the PC as a slowly > > dying dinosaur. > > Is there any reason I should consider getting a top of the line pc > > instead of a new Intel Mac? Money is not an important > > consideration. I never worked with video on a PC because my old PC > > didn't have the strength. > > > > Randolfe (Randy) Wicker > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Daryl Urig" <daryl@> wrote: > > > > > > Rupert, thanks for comments. > > > > > > With flash you can add navigation buttons if you want to have a > > little more than a video, > > > you can have an interactive video. Also, with flash you can save > > out a quicktime and still > > > have some of the navigation capabilaties. > > > > > > Coming from a flash perspective, as I am, what kind of file formats > > would you make > > > available on your vblog site to keep the most viewers happy? > > > > > > I am working on a mac so would probably use Imovie to to video > > editing, and also have pc > > > accessability. > > > > > > Daryl > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
