1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Google and Mozilla get Real

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Da Dego, 3 Aug 2006.

  1. yahooadam

    yahooadam <span style="color:#f00;font-weight:bold">Ultra cs

    Joined:
    21 Mar 2006
    Posts:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    its the other way around <_<
     
  2. woodshop

    woodshop UnSeenly

    Joined:
    14 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    8
    perhaps Real has signed with google is an attempt at mecouning better in the users eye. they will provide better support for google and Mozilla and in turn Real will listen to google and mozilla when they say then need to cut down on teh bloat and stream line there app.
     
  3. tylerpestell

    tylerpestell New Member

    Joined:
    5 Oct 2005
    Posts:
    67
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, what a bad move on Google's and Mozilla's part. Realplayer is trash.

    I think Google and Mozilla should have teamed up with VLC Player. That would be a winning team in my book.
     
  4. Shuriken

    Shuriken same christmas AV for a whole year

    Joined:
    1 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    1,312
    Likes Received:
    22
    Slightly off topic, but it really pisses me off when websites say they are incompatible with firefox, as every website i've ever programmed always works with ease in firefox, but I have to hack it to buggery just to get it to display properly in internet explorer. And even if it was the other way round for these websites, Firefox is used by a decent portion of users, so the designers should accomodate it, saying it's incompatible is either just plain lazy, or some microsoft pay-off based conspiricy :worried:

    I agree though, deffinatly a bad move, but aslong as FF doesn't try to make me install Real then I'm not bothered.

    Matt
     
  5. stephen2002

    stephen2002 New Member

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2003
    Posts:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    I really don't care for Real networks software. I use Rhapsody on a daily basis because I really like the service, but I really hate the software. It it horribly written, just sitting there doing nothing it often sucks 20% CPU power. On playback it sucks the same 20% of CPU power, so they have to have done something horribly wrong with the code. That kind of thing I just can't really trust.

    I do have RealPlayer installed as well. The newer versions are not that horrible of an application, but then again I probably use it about once a month so not often enough to end up annoyed by it. And I turned off all of the associated system tray/alerter "features".
     
  6. Nezuji

    Nezuji New Member

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2004
    Posts:
    247
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm. I've been using RealPlayer happily for years now, and I honestly don't understand all of this fuss. It used to be just people saying that the video quality was crap, but that was always up to the person doing the encoding. I have some exceptionally clear RealPlayer clips that take up way less space than equivalent clips in other formats.

    And if it really were bloatware, surely it would run like a dog on my little Mini-ITX system? The reality is that on my system, RealPlayer ties with -- and occasionally beats -- WMP for playback performance, and they both beat the s**t out of Quicktime.

    Whatever the case, I'll still be using RealPlayer because it's still very popular in Japan -- which is where I get quite a lot of stuff -- and I already have a ton of RealPlayer stuff archived as well.

    Nezuji :)
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page