Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Mac > Mac Systems > QT 6 was good, ...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 1 of 11 Topic 23874 of 24348
Post > Topic >>

QT 6 was good, why is 7 not?

by jt august <starsabre@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 14, 2008 at 02:05 AM

I have an older Mac, a G4 450 agp.  I currently do not have a cash 
needed to even upgrade my cpu or buy a used MDD on eBay.  That having 
been laid out, my question:

QT 6 allowed me to run the "large" sized movies that played at 480 lines 
by 640 or wider at full frame rate and all was well.  Now, under QT 7, 
the smallest size MooVs are 480, and they play worse than WMV files tend 
to.  Why did Apple have to revise QT so high from 6 to 7 that the lowest 
quality videos play worse than QT 6 highest qualities used to?

jt
 




 11 Posts in Topic:
QT 6 was good, why is 7 not?
jt august <starsabre@[  2008-05-14 02:05:34 
Re: QT 6 was good, why is 7 not?
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam  2008-05-14 02:05:22 
Re: QT 6 was good, why is 7 not?
jt august <starsabre@[  2008-05-16 00:32:40 
Re: QT 6 was good, why is 7 not?
sbt <dogbreath@[EMAIL   2008-05-15 17:40:04 
Re: QT 6 was good, why is 7 not?
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam  2008-05-15 20:59:32 
Private Message
   2008-05-15 18:24:18 
Private Message
   2008-05-15 21:48:30 
Private Message
   2008-05-15 19:18:37 
Private Message
   2008-05-16 08:00:27 
Private Message
   2008-05-16 08:36:21 
Private Message
   2008-05-16 07:35:25 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Sun Jul 6 18:15:03 CDT 2008.