# QuickTime vs. Windows Media Player vs. DivX



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

for the video gurus out there, what are the advantages or disadvantages of formats/players?


----------



## MacGYVER (Apr 15, 2005)

I will let someone else explain the long answer, but I will give you my short answer  Oh and you forgot RealPlayer.

One works ------> Sucks -------> Useless


----------



## oryxbiker (Nov 29, 2001)

why and how does divX suck?


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

oryxbiker said:


> why and how does divX suck?


I think he meant that DivX is "useless"

The reason I ask about this is that I have been downloading the Red vs. Blue videos (Halo anime)  and they are avaialable in all 3 formats.

I found that QT are larger than most (mind you the authors are only now converting to QT 7) and the WMP files play "choppy"

DivX seems to play the best and have reasonably sized files.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

QuickTime is, depending on how it's encoded, arguably the best quality, but will produce big files.

WMV is, depending how its encoded, probably the most compressed with the least quality loss (but plays like crap on Macs either way, in my experience).

DivX is decent compression and decent quality and I find plays back best using VLC on the Mac.


----------



## nxnw (Dec 22, 2002)

Some of the above is not accurate. DivX is a compression standard. There is no such thing as quicktime compression. 

Quicktime can have huge files or tiny files, good quality or lousy quality, depending on which codec has been used to compress the data. Since DivX is a variant of MP4, one of the most compact, high quality standards available, DivX files will be similar in size and quality (good and small) to other MP4s.

Divx, like it or not, is the virtual video equivalent of MP3.

Finally, if you have the DivX codec installed, quicktime will play DivX.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

There is no "absolute" answer to this question. What you really need to know is: which should I choose? Answer: what will most likely work.

mov / mpg - pretty much guaranteed to work.

avi / dvix / xvid - probably will work, but there are some that won't. there are many non-standard avi formats, so if you're grabbing a big file, avoid avi in favor of wmv, mov, or mpg. There are utilities to "fix" bizarre avi files, like DivXDoctor, but that's too much hassle for me.

wmv - will probably work with Windows Media Player for Mac, but I bought Flip4Mac and haven't had a problem. Plus, I can now load wmv files into almost any QuickTime-based player, like BitPlayer or NicePlayer.

real - avoid at all costs. while streaming video with RealPlayer is fine, downloaded files will be a nuissance, and will only play in RealPlayer, not anything else. RealPlayer is pretty much a pain in the ass, and the company has little commitment to the Mac.


----------



## mbaldwin (Jan 20, 2003)

h.264 is the way to go...


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

mbaldwin said:


> h.264 is the way to go...


Probably for encoding, yes, but macspectrum is asking which option to download with.


----------



## iNeedhelp (Oct 23, 2005)

How does Windows Media Player suck?


----------



## MacGYVER (Apr 15, 2005)

Windows Media Player for Mac is not and will never be the same as Windows Media Player for Windows. The only thing that Microsoft has produced that is very well done, would have to be the Microsoft Office suite version. Other then that, why they even bother making a Windows Media Player for the Mac, I really don't know. I would rather use VLC over WMP.

It would be nice if everyone on the internet could come to some agreement as to what format they should all use. I mean what a pain in the butt to have so many versions of video players just to watch a certain video from some site or source. 

Some news sites now give you options of picking which player you want to watch on, because not everyone has QT, or WMP, or whatever the others are. Then throw in DiVX which needs to be added to QT? Ok, why that needs to be added to view a video format like DiVX is questionable once again. Why not just pick a standard? Maybe we can throw in a few more new ones and make it even more difficult for watching videos?


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

MacGYVER said:


> Windows Media Player for Mac is not and will never be the same as Windows Media Player for Windows. The only thing that Microsoft has produced that is very well done, would have to be the Microsoft Office suite version.


I've started using the new Messenger. It works well.


MacGYVER said:


> Other then that, why they even bother making a Windows Media Player for the Mac, I really don't know. I would rather use VLC over WMP.


VLC cannot do everything that Windows Media Player or Flip4Mac can.


MacGYVER said:


> It would be nice if everyone on the internet could come to some agreement as to what format they should all use.


Other than a miracle, how would you propose we get "everyone" to agree? While we're at it, let's all agree on which operating system to use, which graphics-format to use, and maybe cure cancer? Have any other reasonable requests?


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

iNeedhelp said:


> How does Windows Media Player suck?


Can't scrub thru the video.


----------



## MacGYVER (Apr 15, 2005)

lpkmckenna said:


> I've started using the new Messenger. It works well.VLC cannot do everything that Windows Media Player or Flip4Mac can.Other than a miracle, how would you propose we get "everyone" to agree? While we're at it, let's all agree on which operating system to use, which graphics-format to use, and maybe cure cancer? Have any other reasonable requests?


Which operating system should still be left up to the user, but it doesn't stop anyone from doing their work right out of the box does it?

Graphics format? I can use one program on my Mac and read all graphics formats, pretty simple if you ask me. But imagine if you had to use one program to view JPEGS, another program to view GIFS, another program to view RAW etc.... that is where we stand for viewing videos on the internet and in general. It is a huge mess when it comes to viewing videos on any system or piece of technology that allows for viewing videos. 

I use one program to listen to variations of sound or music. I use one program to view my photos in just about any format you can throw at me. But man when it comes to videos, look out, you need half a dozen or more applications just so you're not left with some video that can't play in QT, WMP, VCL, RealPlayer etc... and even then you might need to add something to the video player because of some non widely used codec that is ancient and dying from the rest of them.

Face it, when it comes to viewing video on a computer it is a huge mess, and it shouldn't be this complicated.


----------



## iNeedhelp (Oct 23, 2005)

DivX is good for videos (sometimes). Windows Media Player is good for music. For video files, it sucks. And quicktime is good for pretty much everything.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

MacGYVER said:


> Which operating system should still be left up to the user, but it doesn't stop anyone from doing their work right out of the box does it?


If you want to see your Word documents on your new Mac mini, yes.


MacGYVER said:


> Graphics format? I can use one program on my Mac and read all graphics formats, pretty simple if you ask me. But imagine if you had to use one program to view JPEGS, another program to view GIFS, another program to view RAW etc.... that is where we stand for viewing videos on the internet and in general. It is a huge mess when it comes to viewing videos on any system or piece of technology that allows for viewing videos.


Which magic graphics app does this? Took forever to get PNG on Explorer. Only the latest version of iPhoto supports RAW. I can't see my Entourage mail with Spotlight. And I need iChat, Messenger, and ICQ to ensure I can talk with everyone. And I can't seem to get my old Q3A maps to load in UT2004.  Standardization takes time. Hell, we still don't know what the next version of DVDs are going to be.


MacGYVER said:


> I use one program to listen to variations of sound or music. I use one program to view my photos in just about any format you can throw at me. But man when it comes to videos, look out, you need half a dozen or more applications just so you're not left with some video that can't play in QT, WMP, VCL, RealPlayer etc... and even then you might need to add something to the video player because of some non widely used codec that is ancient and dying from the rest of them.


So you have some life'n'death reason you need to see this content made with "non widely used codec" or something?

Like I said above, I just got Flip4Mac and I'm squealing with glee. I'm almost ready to trash VLC from my PowerBook. I now can play almost any video in any QT-based player. Except for RM files, which I never seem to need anyway.


MacGYVER said:


> Face it, when it comes to viewing video on a computer it is a huge mess, and it shouldn't be this complicated.


Video standards are no more complex than any other file standard, you're just choosing to believe there are document format problems for video and nothing else. Open a DOC in TextEdit and see what you get.

If you want to see file incombatibility, check out XML. What started out as a standard for information storage became about 20 standards. That's life.

Face it, this problem is bigger than video. If you got a real solution, let me know. Myself, I've got mine, and it only cost me $12.


----------



## lpkmckenna (Jul 4, 2004)

MacGYVER said:


> Which operating system should still be left up to the user


Gee, thanks for your permission.


----------



## MacGYVER (Apr 15, 2005)

You could cut your chatting software down to one called "Adium" It covers all the chat clients and puts them under one roof. This way you can talk to everyone from all over like iChat, ICQ, Messenger etc.... using one software only. Best part is, it is free and works well.

I agree that the problem is huge. This is why we have a lot of people so confused when it comes to actually making video from their camcorder, then choosing which platform and software to use, to then picking the format to put on their web site. 

Having a Mac, I know exactly what I need to take video from a camcorder, edit and add special effects if desired and output it to a DVD with chapters if I desire. Why would I bother playing around with Windows Media Player? VLC? RealPlayer to output my video on to the internet? QuickTime does the job well, quick and simple. Plus the quality is amazing. 

The point is, we are always reading about complaints or see questions about which video player should I use, because I have this file format and it doesn't play on so and so software that I have. 

Here is a good scenario for ya 

Person comes to you with a JPEG picture..... for some reason they can't open it on their Mac and ask you why, and here is your answer:

"Well you see, Aperture will handle JPEG files, but it means you have to upgrade your Mac. If you want you could try Photoshop, but then after buying that, you will need to buy some 3rd party software to actually view JPEG format in Photoshop. Or you could try Apple's iPhoto, but it might crash as it has too many bugs and to scroll through 10 pictures without getting the beach ball effect is next to impossible. But you know what? There are some fantastic 3rd party software companies over at VersionTracker, yeah just look it up and you can easily download or purchase one of them neat software packages to open up that JPEG file for ya."

In reality the above scenario doesn't exist as most software can handle many formats and not just one kind.

That's basically the game we all play, or explain to the person when they come here looking for advice on what video software to use when they can't open up a certain video file.


----------

