|
pc
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Risking crashes with MS Products; Alternatives
win98 system that (I hate MS products). a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, etc. b) runs most types of popular formats c) will not crash and uninstalls clean d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? "Neutrino Boy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote in message You may want to try a current one.news:Ham9692B49726BF601149339qkms399neutr@213.155.197.138... > Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a > win98 system that (I hate MS products). Show quoteHide quote > > > a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, > etc. b) runs most types of popular formats > c) will not crash and uninstalls clean > d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? > > > I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of > direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > On 14/7/05 10:44 AM, "Neutrino Boy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: A 'complete' package would have to include things like overlay device> I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of > direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > drivers (this is what directx offers programs like bsplayer) - without these it will be hard for the video player to draw fast enough on any sub-par CPUs. These drivers are not small; even if they were to include their own custom ones and not a directX installer, they would fail your other complaint, as it would have to install some display hacks, which generally don't 'uninstall clean'. May I gently suggest you stop using an eight year old operating system, or at the very least download the latest directX available for Win98 - it will be a once-off and bsplayer and the like will work just fine. Ok, thanks for the reply.
The system is fairly current - 800MHZ/256MB ram. Windows SE. I really do not think the OS has much to do with it. All windows OS's are crap imo. It is the developers that cannot offer packages that work on various OSs. And if they do not install clean that is another bad programming feature. Sorry, too much lousy software out there, imo. Ever notice all the new stuff is generally filled with bugs that take months for people to discover; particularily true of MS software. But u may be right, I might have to install more bloat/flakeware ;-) to get a video player that works. It's the rare treat to find a developer that offers a complete package that does not have to take over your entire OS to actually work and installs completely. Cail Young <nospam@anywhere.com> wrote in Show quoteHide quote news:BEFC0CCD.6AD6%nospam@anywhere.com: > On 14/7/05 10:44 AM, "Neutrino Boy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> > wrote: > >> I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >> direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? >> > > A 'complete' package would have to include things like overlay device > drivers (this is what directx offers programs like bsplayer) - without > these it will be hard for the video player to draw fast enough on any > sub-par CPUs. > > These drivers are not small; even if they were to include their own > custom ones and not a directX installer, they would fail your other > complaint, as it would have to install some display hacks, which > generally don't 'uninstall clean'. > > May I gently suggest you stop using an eight year old operating > system, or at the very least download the latest directX available for > Win98 - it will be a once-off and bsplayer and the like will work just > fine. > "NeutrinoBoy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote in message Dude.. if you can't even keep your sh*t current then your opinion is worthnews:GNU96936CA215CE201010011NeutrinoBoy@213.155.197.138... > Ok, thanks for the reply. > > The system is fairly current - 800MHZ/256MB ram. Windows SE. > > I really do not think the OS has much to do with it. All windows OS's > are crap imo. squat. But thanks for offering it anyway.. we were all waiting for it. It is the developers that cannot offer packages that work > on various OSs. And if they do not install clean that is another bad what?> programming feature. Sorry, too much lousy software out there, imo. > a mac user. And certainly not a power user of either platform.> Ever notice all the new stuff is generally filled with bugs that take > months for people to discover; particularily true of MS software > You may want to UPGRADE. THEN go on usenet and trash your current completely> But u may be right, I might have to install more bloat/flakeware ;-) to > get a video player that works. It's the rare treat to find a developer > that offers a complete package that does not have to take over your > entire OS to actually work and installs completely. updates OS. Show quoteHide quote > > > > Cail Young <nospam@anywhere.com> wrote in > news:BEFC0CCD.6AD6%nospam@anywhere.com: > > > On 14/7/05 10:44 AM, "Neutrino Boy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> > > wrote: > > > >> I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of > >> direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > >> > > > > A 'complete' package would have to include things like overlay device > > drivers (this is what directx offers programs like bsplayer) - without > > these it will be hard for the video player to draw fast enough on any > > sub-par CPUs. > > > > These drivers are not small; even if they were to include their own > > custom ones and not a directX installer, they would fail your other > > complaint, as it would have to install some display hacks, which > > generally don't 'uninstall clean'. > > > > May I gently suggest you stop using an eight year old operating > > system, or at the very least download the latest directX available for > > Win98 - it will be a once-off and bsplayer and the like will work just > > fine. > > > NeutrinoBoy <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> writes:
>The system is fairly current - 800MHZ/256MB ram. Windows SE. How can you possibly call that "current"? 800 MHz CPUs date from when,about 2000? And even my old PII-350 system has 512 MB of RAM in it. Windows 98, SE or not, was never a very good operating system and was obsoleted many years ago. In the computer world, "fairly current" might mean something that you could purchase new in perhaps the previous year - not something 5 years old. A "current" Windows system would have at least some Pentium 4 or Athlon CPU, at least 512 MB of RAM, and Windows XP or at worst Windows 2000. >I really do not think the OS has much to do with it. All windows OS's If you're still using Windows 98, I can see why you'd feel that.>are crap imo. >It is the developers that cannot offer packages that work Generally, software supports current hardware and operating systems, and>on various OSs. And if they do not install clean that is another bad >programming feature. Sorry, too much lousy software out there, imo. perhaps old ones going back a few years. >But u may be right, I might have to install more bloat/flakeware ;-) to I have a bunch of old machines, but I run Windows 2000 on them. W2000>get a video player that works. actually runs quite well on a Pentium 200 with 128 MB of RAM. It probably won't play DVD videos, but it's fine for lots of things. The only time I ever use Windows 98 is for some specific radio-programming software that is very old. Dave "NeutrinoBoy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote ... ROFLMAO.> Ok, thanks for the reply. > > The system is fairly current - 800MHZ/256MB ram. Windows SE. Hey, NeutrinoBoy, since your "fairly current" Windows 98 SE machine with an 800 MHz processor and 256 MB of RAM came out... - Dewey lost the election to Truman. - Color television was invented. - JFK made a trip to Dallas and came home in a box. - Lucy and Desi got divorced. - The Beatles broke up. - Green Acres was cancelled from the CBS prime-time lineup. - Nixon resigned the Presidency. - A Hollywood actor became president. It wasn't John Wayne. - The Berlin Wall came down. - Elvis was elected President, and got impeached because he lied about a blow job. - America went to war in Iraq. Twice. Okay, so maybe I'm exaggerating a little. But if you think a Windows 98 (SE) machine with under 1 GB of processor speed and only 256 MB of RAM is "fairly current," you're out of your ever-lovin' mind. Do you drive a Nash Rambler, too? An Edsel? You should really think about getting something a little more current. I hear those American Motors Gremlins are pretty sporty. You can even get 'em with denim seats. And oh, by the way, if you think Windows 98 is about the same thing as Windows XP, you really should come out of the dark ages and join the rest of us in the 21st Century. Heck, I've got a dual-processor Xeon machine with a pair of 2.4 GB processors and 2 GB or RAM and that machine is not even "current." Let me get this straight -- you're trying to do video production on your Model-T computer? Puhleeeeze. Randy On 7/14/2005, RandB managed to type:
Show quoteHide quote > "NeutrinoBoy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote ... You're a funny guy. I enjoyed your history lesson.>> Ok, thanks for the reply. >> >> The system is fairly current - 800MHZ/256MB ram. Windows SE. > > > ROFLMAO. > > Hey, NeutrinoBoy, since your "fairly current" Windows 98 SE machine with an > 800 MHz processor and 256 MB of RAM came out... > > - Dewey lost the election to Truman. > - Color television was invented. > - JFK made a trip to Dallas and came home in a box. > - Lucy and Desi got divorced. > - The Beatles broke up. > - Green Acres was cancelled from the CBS prime-time lineup. > - Nixon resigned the Presidency. > - A Hollywood actor became president. It wasn't John Wayne. > - The Berlin Wall came down. > - Elvis was elected President, and got impeached because he lied about a blow > job. > - America went to war in Iraq. Twice. > > Okay, so maybe I'm exaggerating a little. But if you think a Windows 98 (SE) > machine with under 1 GB of processor speed and only 256 MB of RAM is "fairly > current," you're out of your ever-lovin' mind. Do you drive a Nash Rambler, > too? An Edsel? You should really think about getting something a little > more current. I hear those American Motors Gremlins are pretty sporty. You > can even get 'em with denim seats. > > And oh, by the way, if you think Windows 98 is about the same thing as > Windows XP, you really should come out of the dark ages and join the rest of > us in the 21st Century. > > Heck, I've got a dual-processor Xeon machine with a pair of 2.4 GB processors > and 2 GB or RAM and that machine is not even "current." > > Let me get this straight -- you're trying to do video production on your > Model-T computer? Puhleeeeze. > > Randy Gino -- Gene E. Bloch (Gino) letters617blochg3251 (replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom") NeutrinoBoy wrote:
> The system is fairly current - 800MHZ/256MB ram. Windows SE. Not to be critical, as I don't know what part of the world you are in,but you should know that this is not really current by most standards. > I really do not think the OS has much to do with it. All windows OS's Take my word for it: XP beats the crap out of 98. However, your machine> are crap imo. may not be adequate to run XP. My view is that MS has substantially increased its credibility when it replaced 98 with XP. > It is the developers that cannot offer packages that work Can't argue with that. Unfortunately, unlike you, the public accepts> on various OSs. And if they do not install clean that is another bad > programming feature. Sorry, too much lousy software out there, imo. > Ever notice all the new stuff is generally filled with bugs that take > months for people to discover; this inadequately tested software, and so it goes. I also wonder how and why, over and over, software is released, and fixes appear only after it has been marketed. To be fair, the permutations and combinations of PC components is almost infinite, and it may be very difficult to code a program and be able to predict all possible problems under all possible circumstances. There is no excuse for incomplete uninstalls, and yet they are rampant. > particularily true of MS software. I don't they are the worst culprit at this time.> But u may be right, I might have to install more bloat/flakeware ;-) to Media Player Classic does handle most formats, but I'm not sure it will> get a video player that works. It's the rare treat to find a developer > that offers a complete package that does not have to take over your > entire OS to actually work and installs completely. do it without the required codecs. I find the current version to be stable, which was not always the case. Cail Young wrote:
> May I gently suggest you stop using an eight year old operating system, or Nice diplomatic phrasing, as it should be.> at the very least download the latest directX available for Win98 - it will > be a once-off and bsplayer and the like will work just fine. On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 00:44:18 +0000 (UTC), Neutrino Boy
<NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: >Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a If you hate Microsoft, move to Mac (and learn what claustrophobia>win98 system that (I hate MS products). > > >a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >etc. b) runs most types of popular formats >c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? > > >I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? feels like) or to Linux (and learn what crashes REALLY feel like :-) W98 is pretty stable. Maybe it's time for a clean re-installation Or, if you're wanting to use newer media formats, to get up to date.
Show quote
Hide quote
"Laurence Payne" <lpayne1NOSPAM@dsl.pipexSPAMTRAP.com> wrote in message I recently reclaimed an old Win98 PII 333 MHz 256MB machine from a family news:469cd1tirome432t4153uj8kndspdfm7b2@4ax.com... > On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 00:44:18 +0000 (UTC), Neutrino Boy > <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: > >>Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a >>win98 system that (I hate MS products). >> >> >>a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >>etc. b) runs most types of popular formats >>c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >>d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? >> >> >>I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >>direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > > > If you hate Microsoft, move to Mac (and learn what claustrophobia > feels like) or to Linux (and learn what crashes REALLY feel like :-) > > W98 is pretty stable. Maybe it's time for a clean re-installation > Or, if you're wanting to use newer media formats, to get up to date. member who had moved up. It was a real clunker: slow to load MPEG movie files, frequent crashes, etc. Years of loading and unloading software plus the detritous acquired from surfing the net had crippled the machine. Now, after a reformat of the HD and a re-install of Win98SE along with all updates, I am amazed at how fast that old machine is and how stable. It is currently enjoying a new life serving a grandchild with WIN98 games, educational software, and Internet access to the Disney and other kid's sites. Steve King I guess I was not clear. I am not having problems with the OS. It is
stable. However ALL MS OS's are crap, including XP and their activation code scheme. Since ALL MS products are inherently unstable and bug/security hole filled, and because so much of the other software out there is garbage/incomplete/bloatware/system intrusive, it's hard to find a good program in just about any area. I find the freeware programs are often better than the commercial programs because they are a labor of love, not of profit. To get back to the intention of the OP, I still have heard no suggestions for what I am seeking. Show quoteHide quote "Steve King" <st***@TakeThisOutToReplysteveking.net> wrote in news:zN-dnQDhva2e8EvfRVn-gg@comcast.com: > "Laurence Payne" <lpayne1NOSPAM@dsl.pipexSPAMTRAP.com> wrote in > message news:469cd1tirome432t4153uj8kndspdfm7b2@4ax.com... >> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 00:44:18 +0000 (UTC), Neutrino Boy >> <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: >> >>>Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a >>>win98 system that (I hate MS products). >>> >>> >>>a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >>>etc. b) runs most types of popular formats >>>c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >>>d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? >>> >>> >>>I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >>>direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? >> >> >> If you hate Microsoft, move to Mac (and learn what claustrophobia >> feels like) or to Linux (and learn what crashes REALLY feel like :-) >> >> W98 is pretty stable. Maybe it's time for a clean re-installation >> Or, if you're wanting to use newer media formats, to get up to date. > > I recently reclaimed an old Win98 PII 333 MHz 256MB machine from a > family member who had moved up. It was a real clunker: slow to load > MPEG movie files, frequent crashes, etc. Years of loading and > unloading software plus the detritous acquired from surfing the net > had crippled the machine. Now, after a reformat of the HD and a > re-install of Win98SE along with all updates, I am amazed at how fast > that old machine is and how stable. It is currently enjoying a new > life serving a grandchild with WIN98 games, educational software, and > Internet access to the Disney and other kid's sites. > > Steve King > > "NeutrinoBoy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote ... Then maybe you should go back to pen and paper, and to cutting film, >I guess I was not clear. I am not having problems with the OS. It is > stable. However ALL MS OS's are crap, including XP and their activation > code scheme. Since ALL MS products are inherently unstable and > bug/security hole filled, and because so much of the other software out > there is garbage/incomplete/bloatware/system intrusive, it's hard to > find a good program in just about any area. splicing tape with a razor blade. The heck with this modern computer age. > I find the freeware programs Ahhhhhhh......so now we get to the bottom of it. You just hate capitalists.> are often better than the commercial programs because they are a labor > of love, not of profit. Fine. You go stand under a bridge somewhere holding your cardboard sign that says, "Will Fart For Beer," while the rest of us succeed in life. > To get back to the intention of the OP, I still You want a media player? Try WinAmp. It was real popular back in 1998. > have heard no suggestions for what I am seeking. They may have even updated it. Not that anyone cares anymore. Have you tried logging on to microsoft.com to download any available updates to your Windows Media Player? Or would that be a violation of your self-imposed moratorium on anything Microsoft? Randy NeutrinoBoy wrote:
> I guess I was not clear. I am not having problems with the OS. It is The activation scheme is made necessary due to piracy, etc; it is not> stable. However ALL MS OS's are crap, including XP and their activation > code scheme. intended to be a technical feature of the OS-:) > Since ALL MS products are inherently unstable... I no longer believe this to be true.> I find the freeware programs I'd like to agree, but I can't. There are exceptions, for sure, but I'd> are often better than the commercial programs because they are a labor > of love, not of profit. say that free programs usually have limitations one is not aware of until one tries a non-free product. Laurence Payne <lpayne1NOSPAM@dsl.pipexSPAMTRAP.com> wrote in
Show quoteHide quote news:469cd1tirome432t4153uj8kndspdfm7b2@4ax.com: I have always felt that Linux is much more stable than MS junk; even> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 00:44:18 +0000 (UTC), Neutrino Boy > <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: > >>Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a >>win98 system that (I hate MS products). >> >> >>a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >>etc. b) runs most types of popular formats >>c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >>d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? >> >> >>I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >>direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > > > If you hate Microsoft, move to Mac (and learn what claustrophobia > feels like) or to Linux (and learn what crashes REALLY feel like :-) when it's not it generally makes sense and the information is out there to be had, not some deep secret that some crap MS corp. is trying to hide. The system is stable, it's the new software I'm worried about. And generaly MS add ons just compound the problem of basically poorly authored OS's from MS. Show quoteHide quote > > W98 is pretty stable. Maybe it's time for a clean re-installation > Or, if you're wanting to use newer media formats, to get up to date. On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:55:10 +0000 (UTC), NeutrinoBoy
<NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: >I have always felt that Linux is much more stable than MS junk; even So how can Linux be MORE stable?>when it's not it generally makes sense and the information is out there >to be had, not some deep secret that some crap MS corp. is trying to >hide. The system is stable, Linux is PLAGUED withthe FREE, OPEN SOURCE bugs a thousand miles long.
Show quoteHide quote "Laurence Payne" <lpayne1NOSPAM@dsl.pipexSPAMTRAP.com> wrote in message news:saodd1lnnm66hmuitd48cae9uk4m2q357k@4ax.com... > On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:55:10 +0000 (UTC), NeutrinoBoy > <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote: > > >I have always felt that Linux is much more stable than MS junk; even > >when it's not it generally makes sense and the information is out there > >to be had, not some deep secret that some crap MS corp. is trying to > >hide. The system is stable, > > So how can Linux be MORE stable? "Neutrino Boy" wrote ...
> Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media You hate MS products but are so fond of Win98 that you are> player for a win98 system that (I hate MS products). still running it long after is is obsolete and unsupported? You have a very different worldview and expectations than most of us. > a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, Do you understand that those are mutually-exclusive requirements?> etc. b) runs most types of popular formats Of course, if you are still running Win98, maybe time and progress have different meanings to you? > c) will not crash and uninstalls clean Try a current OS and WMP9 or 10> d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? > I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of Define "complete" in a world where there is a new compression> direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? method/codec every couple of months? Updates and downloads are unavoidable in modern computing. Good luck with your antique OS. The world is moving on. "Richard Crowley" <rcrowl***@xprt.net> wrote in Ok, I see this is a flame group. You make unwarranted assumptions. Inews:11dcu1c4u88qi06@corp.supernews.com: > "Neutrino Boy" wrote ... >> Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media >> player for a win98 system that (I hate MS products). > > You hate MS products but are so fond of Win98 that you are > still running it long after is is obsolete and unsupported? You > have a very different worldview and expectations than most > of us. just got the machine for $15, and have not completed setting it up. The win98SE OS is probably better than many of the later MS OS crap, although it is all crap and I will migrate to Linux eventually. > Do you understand that a GOOD programmer can develop a package that runs>> a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >> etc. b) runs most types of popular formats > > Do you understand that those are mutually-exclusive requirements? > Of course, if you are still running Win98, maybe time and progress > have different meanings to you? on most OS's that does not take over the entire OS, uninstalls clean, and does not make the user hunt around for other software so it will run? Maybe you don't have much in the way of good software on your machine? I don't install junk software on my machines; therefore they crash very infrequently. > Why so I can join the other Rhinocerii that are having more fun finding>> c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >> d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? > > Try a current OS and WMP9 or 10 the latest security holes and bugs in windows latest piece of sh*t OS? > Complete: means that the software actually works by itself; where you do>> I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >> direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > > Define "complete" in a world where there is a new compression > method/codec every couple of months? Updates and downloads > are unavoidable in modern computing. not have to look for other programs to help it run and where u don't have to join a beta testing program that the author doesn't tell you about in order to use it. > Yes, and you stupidly paying for more crap that isn't any better than> Good luck with your antique OS. The world is moving on. the old crap. On 7/14/2005, NeutrinoBoy managed to type:
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowl***@xprt.net> wrote in <SNIP>> news:11dcu1c4u88qi06@corp.supernews.com: > >> "Neutrino Boy" wrote ... > Why so I can join the other Rhinocerii that are having more fun finding The plural of rhinoceros is probably rhinocerotes; it is definitely not > the latest security holes and bugs in windows latest piece of sh*t OS? rhinocerii - but I assume you were just playing...as I am :-) <SNIP> > Complete: means that the software actually works by itself; where you do Remember DOS? Every program was *complete*. It had its own print > not have to look for other programs to help it run and where u don't > have to join a beta testing program that the author doesn't tell you > about in order to use it. drivers, if that was part of what it had to do. Then a new printer came out, and you bought one. Then you had to go to the program's maker to get a driver for your new printer. But wait, there's more: you had to do that for every single program on your DOS computer that printed... So now we have Windows, which provides, in one place, drivers for every printer. No program has its own printer driver. The above scenario now leads to your needing to get exactly *one* driver, and all your programs can now print to the new printer. (The new driver could come from Microsoft, or it could come from the printer maker.) The analogy holds for video and other peripheral-like things as well. Complete might not be the right criterion... Gino -- Gene E. Bloch (Gino) letters617blochg3251 (replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom") "NeutrinoBoy" wrote ...
> Ok, I see this is a flame group. You make unwarranted All of which you failed to mention in your question. Thus the> assumptions. I just got the machine for $15, and have not > completed setting it up. "unwarranted assumptions". You have only youself to blame. > The win98SE OS is probably better than many of the later Ok, I see this is a "nothing is decent but Linux" posting.> MS OS crap, although it is all crap and I will migrate to > Linux eventually. Maybe the flames you see are just a reflection in the Windows? > Do you understand that a GOOD programmer can develop Sure they can. But in order to put beans on the table, their> a package that runs on most OS's that does not take over > the entire OS, uninstalls clean, and does not make the user > hunt around for other software so it will run? management tells them to include a bunch of junk that we don't like, but they can sell advertising/promotion space with. That is precicely why I no longer use anything from Real (or Quicktime, for that matter). WMP is the only remaining well-behaved mainstream media player. > Maybe you don't have much in the way of good software I guess from your perspective of knowing nothing about XP> on your machine? I don't install junk software on my machines; > therefore they crash very infrequently. or the current version of WMP, you might think that. I manage >120 PCs running XP and W2K. I could count the crashes from ALL of them combined over the course of a YEAR on the fingers of one hand and have a finger or two to spare. (And they all have WMP 9 or 10 installed, too. :-) > Complete: means that the software actually works by itself; I've never done any of those things with the >120 machines> where you do not have to look for other programs to help it > run and where u don't have to join a beta testing program > that the author doesn't tell you about in order to use it. I run WMP on. Sorry for your substandard experience. Maybe you should try WMP? Might be good therapy for your MSphobia? >Sure they can. But in order to put beans on the table, their I concur about Real Player. But what problems have you had with>management tells them to include a bunch of junk that we >don't like, but they can sell advertising/promotion space with. >That is precicely why I no longer use anything from Real >(or Quicktime, for that matter). WMP is the only remaining >well-behaved mainstream media player. Quicktime? Dave "Dave Martindale" wrote ...
> >Sure they can. But in order to put beans on the table, their I ran out of patience before figuring out how to turn off all the>>management tells them to include a bunch of junk that we >>don't like, but they can sell advertising/promotion space with. >>That is precicely why I no longer use anything from Real >>(or Quicktime, for that matter). WMP is the only remaining >>well-behaved mainstream media player. > > I concur about Real Player. But what problems have you had > with Quicktime? extraneous junk. And I deal with MOVs so infrequently that I can live without it. "NeutrinoBoy" <NeutrinoBoyF***@excite.com> wrote You get what you pay for.> > Ok, I see this is a flame group. You make unwarranted assumptions. I > just got the machine for $15, and have not completed setting it up. > The win98SE OS is probably better than many of the later MS OS crap, How would you know?> although it is all crap and I will migrate to Linux eventually. I'll agree that Microsoft Windows ME was the worst OS they ever came with. But Windows 2000 Pro was damn good (stable as hell), and Windows XP expanded upon it, adding more functionality and ease of use. You and your little Linux drones can sing the praises of Linux all you want. And while you're at it, enjoy all seven software applications that are available for it. Now, which Linux program did you say is used by professionals who do video for a living? Oh, there aren't any. That's what I thought. Randy On 15/7/05 3:00 PM, "RandB" <NotMyAddr***@All.com> wrote: Shake, along with a handful of other compositing apps can run on Linux, as> Now, which Linux program did you say is used by professionals who do video > for a living? > > Oh, there aren't any. do several CG/animation packages. But for editorial, no. There is one open-source package out there but it's nowhere near even Premiere for features. NeutrinoBoy wrote:
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowl***@xprt.net> wrote in Good policy. Unfortunately it is not always possible to identify the> news:11dcu1c4u88qi06@corp.supernews.com: > I don't install junk software on my machines; therefore they > crash very infrequently. junk before one tries the product, NAd NOW we get these incomplete uninstalls, which INEXCUSABLE! > > Try a current OS and WMP9 or 10 Pretty good, I'd say, in spite of them being a favourite target.> > Good luck with your antique OS. The world is moving on. As I mentioned previously, I'd say that your assumptions about XP not> Yes, and you stupidly paying for more crap that isn't any better than > the old crap. being superior to '98 are invalid. Neutrino Boy wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found.> win98 system that (I hate MS products). > > > a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, > etc. b) runs most types of popular formats > c) will not crash and uninstalls clean > d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? > > > I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of > direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? > http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli Gee thanks RS. I can see there is at least one guy out there that tries
to offer a relevant answer to the question and not excuses and flames because they do not have an answer. Show quoteHide quote RS <m***@mail.com> wrote in news:42d68ce5$1_2@newspeer2.tds.net: > Neutrino Boy wrote: >> Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a >> win98 system that (I hate MS products). >> >> >> a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >> etc. b) runs most types of popular formats >> c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >> d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? >> >> >> I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >> direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? >> > > Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found. > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli > NeutrinoBoy wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > Gee thanks RS. I can see there is at least one guy out there that tries I sense an occasional bureaucratic slant in posts in this forum on > to offer a relevant answer to the question and not excuses and flames > because they do not have an answer. > > RS <m***@mail.com> wrote in news:42d68ce5$1_2@newspeer2.tds.net: > > >>Neutrino Boy wrote: >> >>>Can anyone recommend a good alternative to MS media player for a >>>win98 system that (I hate MS products). >>> >>> >>>a) comes complete-do not have to hunt for ancilliary libraries, >>>etc. b) runs most types of popular formats >>>c) will not crash and uninstalls clean >>>d) is the least intrusive into the system/registry as possible? >>> >>> >>>I tried bsplayer and got a message saying I need some version of >>>direct x I think. Can't these developers offer complete packages?? >>> >> >>Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found. >> >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli >> > > occasion. Sometimes people feel being technically correct is more important than just giving a simple answer. This little gem is about the only free app I've ever seen that has codec's to play MGP2 and DVD built in, and, it works, its small, and its clean of any spy or adware. Its like software used to be, back in the old days....:) RS wrote:
Show quoteHide quote > NeutrinoBoy wrote: Really? This was certainly not the case with previous versions. The> > Gee thanks RS. I can see there is at least one guy out there that tries > > to offer a relevant answer to the question and not excuses and flames > > because they do not have an answer. > > > > RS <m***@mail.com> wrote in news:42d68ce5$1_2@newspeer2.tds.net: > > > >> > >>Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found. > >> > >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli > >> > > > > This little gem is about the only free app I've ever seen that has > codec's to play MGP2 and DVD built in... only player I know that does not need a separate MPEG2 (i.e. DVD) decoder is VLC, which works, but is not the most bug-free or most stable product out there.
Show quote
Hide quote
On 15 Jul 2005 02:58:11 -0700, "bxf" <b***@topman.net> wrote: #1: VLC. Kicks ass. Free. Can even play DVD content straight from an>> >>Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found. >> >> >> >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli >> >> >> > >> >> This little gem is about the only free app I've ever seen that has >> codec's to play MGP2 and DVD built in... > >Really? This was certainly not the case with previous versions. The >only player I know that does not need a separate MPEG2 (i.e. DVD) >decoder is VLC, which works, but is not the most bug-free or most >stable product out there. ISO file. Plays HD TS files. Streams files across a network. Runs on every OS out there. YOU DO NOT NEED ANYTHING ELSE, PERIOD. #2: MPC. Just like good ol' Win98's MPlayer, but better. Not as versatile or cross-platform as VLC, though.
Show quote
Hide quote
On 18/7/05 4:19 PM, "Karyudo" <karyudo_use***@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote: Yeah, but it's such a large download.... ;)> On 15 Jul 2005 02:58:11 -0700, "bxf" <b***@topman.net> wrote: > > >>>>> Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found. >>>>> >>>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> This little gem is about the only free app I've ever seen that has >>> codec's to play MGP2 and DVD built in... >> >> Really? This was certainly not the case with previous versions. The >> only player I know that does not need a separate MPEG2 (i.e. DVD) >> decoder is VLC, which works, but is not the most bug-free or most >> stable product out there. > > #1: VLC. Kicks ass. Free. Can even play DVD content straight from an > ISO file. Plays HD TS files. Streams files across a network. Runs on > every OS out there. YOU DO NOT NEED ANYTHING ELSE, PERIOD. On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 23:42:41 +1000, Cail Young <nospam@anywhere.com>
wrote: Show quoteHide quote >On 18/7/05 4:19 PM, "Karyudo" <karyudo_use***@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote: (Lest anyone think he's serious, it really is tiny for what it does.> >> On 15 Jul 2005 02:58:11 -0700, "bxf" <b***@topman.net> wrote: >> >> >>>>>> Media Player Classic. Open Source, can be found. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> This little gem is about the only free app I've ever seen that has >>>> codec's to play MGP2 and DVD built in... >>> >>> Really? This was certainly not the case with previous versions. The >>> only player I know that does not need a separate MPEG2 (i.e. DVD) >>> decoder is VLC, which works, but is not the most bug-free or most >>> stable product out there. >> >> #1: VLC. Kicks ass. Free. Can even play DVD content straight from an >> ISO file. Plays HD TS files. Streams files across a network. Runs on >> every OS out there. YOU DO NOT NEED ANYTHING ELSE, PERIOD. > >Yeah, but it's such a large download.... ;) It's 7.9M for the Windows installer, and 11MB for the Mac. Other OS'es must be on another page...) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics