Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Um...just stumbled across this article that claims Windows has pulled ahead of Mac in digital video editing.

Say it ain't so!!! I am no technical geek, so I would appreciate some clarification of all the stuff mentioned in the article.

Your thoughts??? :rolleyes:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
I wouldn't be too worried about this guy's conclusions, he's not coming from a netural corner.
"... Windows XP has finally pulled well ahead of the Mac in digital-video capabilities and has always been the superior system for digital photos and music. ..."

So there you go. DV was the one, last, nagging area of computing that Windows had yet to conquer with superior features and performance. And all this without having to bother about all that annoying hardware performance, too. If it can run XP, you're done.

A little later, we read:
"... capture your raw video footage, typically from a camcorder. Unlike iMovie, Windows Movie Maker 2 supports analog and digital video, so any video (or audio) source you can connect to your PC is automatically supported. ..."

This is pure nonsense. The reviewer either doesn't understand what he's talking about, or (even worse) he does.

Absolutely everything a Windows PC uses for data (text, pictures, video) must be digitized, and if it's not output as DV then it's got to be another digital format.

Here on Macs, we use QuickTime (export to DV) if it isn't DV already. Apparently WindowsMM can dispense with all that and use magic instead.

I didn't bother to read the rest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
"For example, you can store 1 to 1.5 hours of full-resolution (720 x 480) WMV 9 video in just a gigabyte of hard disk space. With the Mac, you can store only 6 minutes of full-resolution digital video per gigabyte."

He is obviously comparing compressed video with uncompressed video here. And you can compress movies on a Mac with MPEG-4 which is an open standard... instead of some proprietary crap by Microsoft. I am not sure how these two compare though.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
Yes, that would be the ultra compressed Windows Media Video 9 format vs. the raw DV strems that iMove works with. What he doesn't mention is that once WMV is compressed down it is hard to get it back up to a respectable quality, or to edit it in anything but WMM.

I think what he was talking about with WMM2 supporting "analogue video" was that WMM2 can import directly from an A/V card, whereas iMove can only import directly from a DV source.

Of course, iMovie 3 is rumoured to be the next iApp to be updated, and with rumours of Chapter Markers, Wide Screen video formats, and a few others, maye they will put A/V cards back into power macs?

--PB
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
" ...I think what he was talking about with WMM2 supporting "analogue video" was that WMM2 can import directly from an A/V card, whereas iMove can only import directly from a DV source. ..."

Certainly that's one possible interpretation. He's implying that Macs need A/V cards to do video; of course if you did have one, it would have 3rd party SW to create a DV stream as well as any number of video formats.

I think you put it well, though. We can't go by what he says, we must somehow figure out what he meant. This is a standard defence of those who set out to confuse us, or to selectively report on the facts. No rebuttal, and his words stand.

When someone does point out a valid complaint, he can always rephrase his comments while simultanously dismissing you by saying that "anybody who knows anything about ... could see that I meant ..."

I remember this site from a few years ago. At the time, buying a hundred bucks worth of PCI cards allowed you to network your PC via ordinary phone lines. 12 years earlier, you could do the same thing with any Mac and a $10 Farralon Phone-Net adapter (the adapter was so simple, I can make you one today for about 50 cents, retail). Both systems relied on the unused 2 lines of a typical 4-line phone installation.

Obviously this product is effectively dead as Ethernet replaced dialup; so now he's morphed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,795 Posts
There are always going to be these people out there unfortuneatly, that really don't seem to like Apple or its products. I am stumped as to why. Most of them seem to be stuck with bad impressions of System 7 and early versions of 8.

They seem to think that nothing is an innovation unless MS adopts it, whether they adopt it 2 months before, or as is more often the case, 4 years after.

Take Digital Video Editing as a prime example.

I don't exactly know why he says that Windows "...has always been the superior system for digital photos and music...", what with Photoshop and ProTools being two prime market bases for Apple for many years now.

It is an interesting twist of fate that a tool designed specifically for the transfer of information such as the internet is the source of more dis-information than most people can concieve.

--PB
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
You have to really hunt to find accurate information on the Web; this isn't really any different than TV, Newspapers or the Magazine Rack.

Good reviews are hard to find and generally hard to read (full of information that you have to think about).

One fairly common example would be two popular new-car magazines, namely Motor Trend and Car & Driver. If you are unfamiliar with them, go down to your public library some day and read each magazine's review of the same vehicle, side by side.

MT is an industry shill while C&D makes attempts to be a little more objective. If you like, compare both to Consumer Reports (which I find to be least objective, despite it's fine reputation. They definitely have an agenda to push, but if you can recognise it they provide good information the others don't). Still, C&D isn't exactly immune to pushing it's own agenda either. True, critical automotive journalism is nearly impossible to find, so your next best solution is to get to know the reviewers themselves (means reading a lot) and understand their preferences and how it may affect what they choose to print. Since it's so rare (to the point of extinction) to find neutral reviewers, you always have to read between the lines and try to figure out where the guy is coming from before you can actually use any information he provides. You can apply this to a review of most anything you are curious about or are considering.

One of the most notorious magazines in the HiFi industry was Stereo Review, where each review would end with something like "this product would work very well in any system and you should consider it the next time you shop". SR would also kill reviews of any product that tested poor, would allow hand-selected items to be reviewed, would give manufacturers a second chance, and would only occasionally review a product whose manufacturer didn't advertise (basically, to "prove" that ads didn't matter). Still, SR quotes were prominent in product advertising and before it went broke due to mismanagement, was the largest circulation HiFi magazine on the market.

Another good way to vet your reviewers is to re-read a review of a product (say a SW app) that you use and know well. See if the review matches your own experience.

This article we've been talking about comes from what I would consider to be the least reliable, considering it was set up to promote PC network-over-phone line products that began to show up a few years ago. I can practically guarantee this site never, ever, mentioned that the $60-100 or so PC package (2 PCI cards and lines) could be duplicated with a $20 kit (Farralon PhoneNet) on any 2 Macs made since 1984*. (If you are willing to give up your modem, you can do it on a new G4, but you will have to shell out a few bucks for the Serial Port adapter).

* If you're interested, for about a dollar and an unused Mac Serial cable, you can make your own PhoneNet system. Both the PC and Mac solutions relied on transmitting data over the 2 unused wires in a typical 4-wire home telephone system. It's not that fast, which is why both versions are essentially dead (the PC kind showed up too late, while the Mac one has been replaced by Ethernet) and this site is now a general PC site.

This guy probably started hating Macs right about the time someone first eMailed him pointing this stuff out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,804 Posts
That was written by Paul Thurrott, one of the biggest anti-Mac trolls out there. Everything he writes is a MS ad, just go check out his ultra-lame winsupersite.

Take everything that guy says with a super huge chunk of salt - the guy's an idiot, plain and simple.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
I had a big rant prepared, and you guys hit all the points before I did. Anyone had the pleasure of putting a firewire card in a PC? Ugh.

I just saw a USB (not 2.0) video capture gadget on sale at Futureshop for $300. USB. What a joke.

So I'll boil it down. This guy is an idiot.

-SJ.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top