Real Player for OSX [Archive]

AlphaTech

Mar 24, 2002, 12:53 PM

One of the main resons that I don't like Real Player (any platform, and any version) is that it is a b*tch to set up behind a firewall. If they tighten up the firewall to protect us from viruses, real player is one of the first things to stop working. Quicktime on the other hand, works no matter what they do, as long as the network doesn't go down.

eyelikeart

Mar 24, 2002, 03:42 PM

Real Player has always been just a pain in my @ss...

in previous versions....it crashed the older Mac OS constantly...

I honestly feel there should be a standard for media....Quicktime...

Taft

Mar 24, 2002, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by AlphaTech
One of the main resons that I don't like Real Player (any platform, and any version) is that it is a b*tch to set up behind a firewall. If they tighten up the firewall to protect us from viruses, real player is one of the first things to stop working. Quicktime on the other hand, works no matter what they do, as long as the network doesn't go down.

Good point! I experienced the same problem at my last job. You have to worry about opening up ports for viewing content and its just a big pain.

Plus real media looks crappy when compared to .mpeg or .mov files. Apple definitely has the best technology.

Matthew

chmorley

Mar 24, 2002, 05:58 PM

People probably know this already, but Realplayer does work in Classic. I hardly ever use Classic anymore, but that's one of the few times I do.

Still, it will be nice to have Realplayer (or RealOne) for OS X.

Chris

CharlesOwens6

Mar 24, 2002, 11:50 PM

I think real player is a pain too. It's just that there are so many sites that use only real player for sound samples and video clips that it kind of limits my web browsing in OSX. I agree that Qicktime should be the standard. It looks and works better. Thanks for all the replies.

eyelikeart

Mar 25, 2002, 02:11 PM

what pisses me off is when sites have media available for both formats....but the one file I want is Real Player only and not Quicktime!!! :mad:

Gelfin

Mar 25, 2002, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by tfaz1
I don't like Real Networks. Their biz practices remind me of Microsoft. But I also dislike missing some content that I had access to while running OS9.

In a sense, yes, but Real reminds me less of Microsoft (an abusive monopolist) and more of a company on the ropes trying desperately to force consumers to use their products. It amazes me people bother with the hassle of Real anymore. Not sure why struggling companies all seem to arrive at this conclusion that you can gain market share by sufficiently annoying your customers. Are they teaching that in b-school nowadays?

nikoli

Mar 26, 2002, 09:32 AM

:confused:
Where can I get a beta version of Real Player for OS X???¿:confused:

voicegy

Mar 26, 2002, 12:24 PM

If I ever go to a site whose only choices are, say, RealPlayer or Winblows Media Player to view whatever they are offering, I just go somewhere else.

Real is a pain to set up, is herky-jerky, unreliable, UGLY, full of damn ads, crashes, and I've had to even re-intall it on ocassion on the same machine to get it to work after it HAD worked (albeit poorly) in the past.

I couldn't care LESS if I ever see RP for OS X.

:mad:

AlphaTech

Mar 26, 2002, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by voicegy
If I ever go to a site whose only choices are, say, RealPlayer or Winblows Media Player to view whatever they are offering, I just go somewhere else.

Real is a pain to set up, is herky-jerky, unreliable, UGLY, full of damn ads, crashes, and I've had to even re-intall it on ocassion on the same machine to get it to work after it HAD worked (albeit poorly) in the past.

I couldn't care LESS if I ever see RP for OS X.

:mad:

I agree with you there. There was a site that was showing a piece of anime last summer that only offered it in real player and wmp formats. I installed both, but still couldn't watch it. I contacted the site, and because I was not alone with the issue, they ordered up a bunch of DVD's and sent them to everyone that sent feedback with issues watching the movie. When the DVD's came into them, they sent out an email letting me know that it would be shipping within a few days (they had to process all the orders/list of people to send them to). Now I have a free movie to watch at some point. That is good a customer satisfaction practice.

dantec

Mar 26, 2002, 12:51 PM

Real player is such a hassle, Quicktime is sooo easy...

Quicktime asks you once for your connection rate, and doesn't pester you every time you want to view something online...

Long live Quicktime...

And Quicktime player is free, has no bad banners, and doesn't pester you as much to buy Real G2!!! Quicktime also crashes less, now has more content and has a nice interface.

AlphaTech

Mar 26, 2002, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by dantec
Real player is such a hassle, Quicktime is sooo easy...

Quicktime asks you once for your connection rate, and doesn't pester you every time you want to view something online...

Long live Quicktime...

And Quicktime player is free, has no bad banners, and doesn't pester you as much to buy Real G2!!! Quicktime also crashes less, now has more content and has a nice interface.

Very true... plus, IF you want to get the pro version, it's a $30 online purchase where they email you the registration number. I did that a month or so ago, just so that I can save online Quicktime movies/files to my drive for viewing later. If you are only viewing stuff online and such, and don't need to save it to your system, then the normal version is perfect.

I just hope that the registration number that I just bought for version 5 works for version 6. I don't mind paying the $30 every two versions, but wouldn't be as happy if I needed to get a new one for version 6 when that comes out.

bakdai

Apr 17, 2002, 12:09 PM

Unfortunately, many of my favorite sites still use real player only at times. It's not that I can't just run it in classic, it's that I don't want to fire up classic for just one program. I have carbon or cocoa apps for mostly everything else I need except real player. I know it's not the best app in the world, but b/c many sites just use it and nothing else, and I happen to like those sites, I have no choice but to use it. Also, if you run real in classic and do other things in os x, it skips like a mother (for me anyway) and that annoys the crap out of me. So real player x, get here soon! I hope someone can tell me some kind of date on it. Thanks.

dantec

Apr 17, 2002, 02:11 PM

Most sites over the years have adopted Quicktime. But there are still a few ("stupid" few, who havn't been enlightened).

By far the biggest Real-Quicktime decision mistake comes from CNN. Now they have chosen to make you "pay" to view video + use Real!!!

You know, this might sound crazy, but sometimes I really think Apple & MS should team together on this whole thing and crush real.

Apple would provide the software, and M$ would provide funding, and make (literally force) websites to recognize Quicktime and force them to use it otherwise M$ would boycott it.

I think Apple should renew it's agreement with M$ but change it slightly. Make IE ship default on Macs and make Quicktime ship default for PC.

britboy

Apr 17, 2002, 03:15 PM

Realplayer for OSX was scheduled for release sometime around June this year.
It'll be nice to have, even if is it a regular pos.

mac15

Apr 18, 2002, 01:29 AM

Quicktime streaming is way better
especially QT6 its super smooth

Geert

Apr 18, 2002, 03:34 AM

I'll stick with QT, thank you.

I hope Apple adds all Windooz extensions so I can Annoy my peecee palls again:D

Dunepilot

Apr 18, 2002, 05:42 AM

even though RP does some damn irritating things like being very slow to quit (which makes me think it's sending system info across to real - if it is, that's very dodgy), the file sizes are just so much smaller than QT.

Also, quicktime was never really intended for streaming media at all. Rather, the whole file comes across to your cache whatever happens, as I understand it.

One thing I'd say is that I worked a year ago in my holidays for a dotcom converting their WMP files to QT, and their technical guy felt that QT was not technically suited to streaming content, but that they had to support Mac users as well as PC users and therefore the transition had to be made.

I think I probably pissed the guy off, talking about how great Macs were all the time, when he just wanted to drool over his new Compaq server;)

AlphaTech

Apr 18, 2002, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by Dunepilot
even though RP does some damn irritating things like being very slow to quit (which makes me think it's sending system info across to real - if it is, that's very dodgy), the file sizes are just so much smaller than QT.

Also, quicktime was never really intended for streaming media at all. Rather, the whole file comes across to your cache whatever happens, as I understand it.

One thing I'd say is that I worked a year ago in my holidays for a dotcom converting their WMP files to QT, and their technical guy felt that QT was not technically suited to streaming content, but that they had to support Mac users as well as PC users and therefore the transition had to be made.

I think I probably pissed the guy off, talking about how great Macs were all the time, when he just wanted to drool over his new Compaq server;)

I guess no one told them that wmp is also available for the Mac. Granted, I use QT5 (pro) all the time, and pretty much never use wmp. I despise real player since it has major issues with going through our firewall. Quicktime just uses the same connection that your browser does (by default, unlike rp which you have to hunt down the settings in order to make it do that).

I have seen QT streaming, and it works well enough for me. Granted, I do have a high speed internet connection at home (as well as at work) which probably helps out :D.

I think the reason that guy was pissed off about you saying how great the Mac's are, is because in the back of his mind, he knew it was true.

Mac's rule, peecee's (and their users) just drool :D...

ejm625

Apr 18, 2002, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by dantec
Most sites over the years have adopted Quicktime. But there are still a few ("stupid" few, who havn't been enlightened).

By far the biggest Real-Quicktime decision mistake comes from CNN. Now they have chosen to make you "pay" to view video + use Real!!!

You know, this might sound crazy, but sometimes I really think Apple & MS should team together on this whole thing and crush real.

Apple would provide the software, and M$ would provide funding, and make (literally force) websites to recognize Quicktime and force them to use it otherwise M$ would boycott it.

I think Apple should renew it's agreement with M$ but change it slightly. Make IE ship default on Macs and make Quicktime ship default for PC.

Dream on buddy. You heard of Windows media player?

Foocha

Apr 18, 2002, 01:23 PM

I hope Apple has grown out of heavy handed Microsoft-style tactics, and wouldn't enter into the deal you suggest, even if Microsoft offered it (which they wouldn't).

Let's face facts though - QuickTime is looking a little long in the tooth, and it's not much help when you want to watch a DivX file. Windows Media Player is better - it has much better compression.

Real Media Player is a necessary evil for anyone who wants to use sites like bbc.co.uk. Now that my copy of Photoshop 7 has shipped, I'm tantalisingly close to never using Classic or OS9 again! Roll on Real Player for OSX!

blackpeter

Apr 18, 2002, 05:32 PM

I'm with Foo. I'm not a huge fan of Real either. But I've seen some of the pay content for RealOne and I have to say that it's pretty good. For news/sports junkies, Real has a lot to offer. I'd love to have it as an option for OSX.

On another note: WinMedia Player sucks too. But when it comes to viewing content on some sites that only support WinMedia, it's better than nothing.

bakdai

May 14, 2002, 03:10 PM

It's the middle of May and no word yet anywhere on when Real Player for X is going to get here. Am I going to have to wait until friggin' Jaguar is released?

dantec

May 15, 2002, 11:56 AM

Knowing real, they will probably try to punish us because Apple is a major competitor with Quicktime. Hell they probably only have 2 engineers working on Real Player X!!

AlphaTech

May 15, 2002, 11:59 AM

I don't even think about using real player... Pretty much all the content I care to see is available via either QuickTime or wmp. Most content has at least one format available (like real and wmp or real and QuickTime, or a combination of those three).

Hell, I got a free dvd one time because I couldn't get real player to work on my TiBook (rev A) under either OS 9 or OS X. The site that was streaming the content I wanted to watch (a piece of anime) sent the dvd to anyone that reported having the issue.

CharlesOwens6

May 15, 2002, 01:39 PM

It's just that sites like cdnow, and MTV use real player for there sound and video samples. Cdnow also uses MS Media player for there sound samples but when I click on those samples it triggers a classic environment startup instead of using MS Media player for OSX that I have installed. I don't like real player personally but it seems to be one of my only options at this point.

bakdai

May 16, 2002, 10:08 PM

So is RealOne the same as Real Player? Because if it is, then all of us that have no choice but to use real player to access certain sites we like, we're screwed for a long time. Hopefully Real Player is different and will be out. I could give a rat's ass about RealOne. Just give me the damn player is os x and call it a day.

Solipsys

May 23, 2002, 03:42 AM

Just about the worst windoze port ever made... next to the Flash player. They made the absolute minimum amount of code changes just to get it working on Macs. For instance it quits when you close the window, just like on a windoze machine.

Solipsys

May 23, 2002, 03:45 AM

That's another "standard" that is seriously missing from OSX... sometimes I feel like us mac users are just treated like total suckers :)

SilvorX

May 25, 2002, 01:40 AM

Originally posted by bakdai
So is RealOne the same as Real Player? Because if it is, then all of us that have no choice but to use real player to access certain sites we like, we're screwed for a long time. Hopefully Real Player is different and will be out. I could give a rat's ass about RealOne. Just give me the damn player is os x and call it a day.
RealOne is alot like Real Player 8, but RealOne has a major GUI change, it has more features included to "try" to please pc users (n it didnt work) by adding integrated cd burning, playing cds, etc...
its just a cheap rip off of wmp7/8 for windows since most of the new features introduced in RealOne Player for windows was introduced in WMP 7/8 for windows...its SLOW and buggy as hell, takes a few min to load up, if you close it, it takes a while to load and i usually have to use the task manager to close it, and it was even worse for win 98....
http://members.lycos.co.uk/silvorgold/realone.jpg

Apple should take on Real Player by as some ppl were saying, add .rm and all realplayer extensions to be compatible with quicktime, so osx users dont have to worry bout dling realplayer

j763

May 25, 2002, 09:45 AM

A couple of points to make...

For a start, there'd kind of be a legal issue with allowing qt to play propriotary format files (such as rm) with no permission with real. Secondly, Apple and MS aren't teaming up to crush real... from what i've heard, apple's got some sort of deal with real... And if those MPEGLA ppl weren't so ********** greedy, we wouldn't even be discussing this issue -- I don't think we should support the wide use of .mov files any more than we should of .asf or .rm files. They're all propriatary and they all suck ass. Sure, I prefer QT, but you can't play .mov files in any other player apart from QT...