Re: AVI versus MPEG 2.0 for win3.x !!!

Article View: comp.multimedia

Article #54

#54

From: Alasdair Grant
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1992 12:48

12 lines
1145 bytes

In article <TTG8KOQ@zelator.in-berlin.de> leo@zelator.in-berlin.de (Stefan Hartmann) writes:
>I just have the tested the performance of the new AVI
>(audio Video Interleaved) from Microsoft
>versus the new Xing Technology  MPEG for Windows 2.0 version
>with sound-WAV-support !
>
>AVI is too slow and the file size is too huge....

... but isn't the speed difference because MPEGXING pokes around in the
video card? It still doesn't work with a Paradise card at 1024x768, which
is what I use for Windows. Better something that works slowly than something
that doesn't work at all... (not that I've tried AVI yet)

Technical Details

Message-ID: <A.Grant.11.720708495@ucs.cam.ac.uk>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!uknet!pavo.csi.cam.ac.uk!ucs.cam.ac.uk!A.Grant

References: <TTG8KOQ@zelator.in-berlin.de>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!uknet!pavo.csi.cam.ac.uk!ucs.cam.ac.uk!A.Grant
From: A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant)
Newsgroups: comp.multimedia,comp.graphics,alt.binaries.pictures.d,alt.graphics
Subject: Re: AVI versus MPEG 2.0 for win3.x !!!
Message-ID: <A.Grant.11.720708495@ucs.cam.ac.uk>
Date: 2 Nov 92 12:48:15 GMT
References: <TTG8KOQ@zelator.in-berlin.de>
Sender: news@infodev.cam.ac.uk (USENET news)
Organization: University of Cambridge
Lines: 12
Nntp-Posting-Host: seaeagle.csi.cam.ac.uk

Reply to Parent Message