Why cant Powerbook users host a MultiChat?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by JeDiBoYTJ, May 10, 2005.

  1. JeDiBoYTJ macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #1
    It doesn't make any sense. me and my friends (1 Powerbook user, 1 older G4 user) wanted to do a multi-chat, but the gosh darn (+) was never available for any of us.

    Why cant my Powerbook, one of the latest and greatest, host a multichat? I can join one, but I dont know of anyone who has a faster mac than me :rolleyes:
     
  2. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #2
    i don't see in your sig... both using panther or tiger or what?

    the powerbooks can't host video conference in Tiger due to the processor load with H.264.

    maybe a mic was unavailable on the G4?

    same software version?

    could be plenty of reasons. i'm sure someone can chime in with more info if you give us a bit more info though.

    OS of both machines, what kind of multichat you are doing (audio or video).. etc.
     
  3. JeDiBoYTJ thread starter macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #3
    15in 1.5ghz Powerbook. 1GB of RAM. Running 10.4 Tiger

    We were trying to multichat with video

    everything is exactly the same (software wise)

    I can view h.264 video fine, except at 1080i where it gets a little choppy... I doubt a little video chat is higher than 720p or 1080i :rolleyes:

    I betcha if I was able to host a video chat from this PB, it would run fine... im waiting for either a hack or an update that lowers the requirements a little... this whole "H.264" garbage is starting to tick me off :mad:
     
  4. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #4
    a hack won't cut it man. H.264 is very processor intensive. basically it's saying your machine isn't capable of both decompressing and playing the video you are receiving while compressing the video you are sending. it requires a dual processor G4 or any G5. dual processor G4 so that one processor encodes, the other decodes. a G5 is fast enough to do it on one chip at this point. such is life man. with new technology we start to see some computers just can't handle it. however, i do wish that apple would've allowed Tiger users who can't do the video chat to at least downgrade to a different codec if they so choose.. that way it isn't totally worthless.
     
  5. emw macrumors G4

    emw

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    #5
    Agreed - I'd like to be able to host multi-chats from time to time, but can't since I don't have dual-cpu or G5. Maybe it's a good excuse to get one, but I'd rather just be able to step down in quality a little on the video.
     
  6. jsw Moderator emeritus

    jsw

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Location:
    Andover, MA
    #6
    My guess: if PBs with improved CPUs don't come out within a month or so, we will see a reduced-quality multi-chat hosting capability (no "reflections", etc.).

    However, no matter how you slice it, compositing multiple streams into one broadcast image is a hefty CPU task.
     
  7. JeDiBoYTJ thread starter macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #7
    I dont really care for a 'HD Quality' video chat... the video quality I had before I upgraded to tiger is MORE than enough...

    If I can do a 1 on 1 video chat, while editing in FCP... I think I should be able to do a multi video chat... this is getting ridiculous...
     
  8. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #8
    it isn't HD quality video man. it's just a new codec. it compresses a lot more than older codecs. it's just a high demand codec that requires a lot of processing power.

    trust me i understand your complaint, but you need to understand that technology CHANGES. you probably don't remember when playing mp3's was really CPU intensive and it took longer than 3 minutes to rip and encode a track from a cd right? it used to take about 10 minutes to encode an mp3 on my old pentium machine.

    so do you understand, or do i have to continue to explain?

    ultimately the problem is that apple was stupid and didn't include an option to use the old codec for video conferencing, which means they leave out a VERY LARGE portion of their users who switch to Tiger. in fact, ALL mobile devices are unable to host video chats now. that's just a sad thing.
     
  9. screensaver400 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    #9
    Its kind of dumb when a $2699 Powerbook can't do it, but an $899 iMac (older rev) can. I could understand if the Powerbook was a few rev's old, but any laptop you buy today doesn't support it, and theres no optional upgrade to support it.

    Its really time for those dual-core G4s...
     
  10. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #10
    $899 iMac? only G5 iMacs support video conferencing. You must be talking used vs new.. which doesn't make sense. you're comparing apples to oranges. try again.

    yes, apple made a mistake here, they should've provided a fall back. go email them on the OS X feedback page. whining won't do you any good, that's to all of you. go provide feedback instead of wasting your time complaining on here.

    note that i'm refering to HOSTING a chat.. not participating in one.

    http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/ichat/

    that has the full rundown on what can do what.
     
  11. Gizmotoy macrumors 65816

    Gizmotoy

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    #11
    You can get new previous-generation iMac G5s from the Apple Store for $899, that's what he was referring to.
     
  12. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #12
    online? i'm interested now... :p

    EDIT: ah, they're refurbished. no thanks.
     
  13. chibianh macrumors 6502a

    chibianh

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Location:
    Colorado
    #13
    Apple's iSight hasn't been updated since it's release.. maybe it's due for an update... with built in on board chip for compressing video :D
     
  14. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #14
    Actually, it has received two minor updates since it was introduced, although you wouldn't know that just by looking at one.

    On a related note, my iMac G4 can't host multi-way video conferences either - in fact, none of the Macs in my family are capable. Of the four Macs, only one could be considered due for replacement, but its owner isn't exactly keen on replacing it. So I guess I'm stuck, like those with PowerBooks and iBooks.
     
  15. JeDiBoYTJ thread starter macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #15
    I understand that technology changes... but why leave out an entire line of computers. from what I understand, portables outsell all PowerMacs. It would only make sense to allow portables to host a video chat, even if you would need to use an older codec to do it.

    Yes, I do remember when encoding an MP3 took a long time. I also remember I when I first got my CD Burner. I put it in my old Pentium Machine... and there wasnt a single program that would convert MP3 straight to CD, you would need to convert it to WAV, then burn using the program, which took over 45mins on a 2x burner ;)
     
  16. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #16
    you mean... like one of these?

    ah good riddance Easy CD Creator... good riddance.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #17
    I remember using one of those old things...

    I'm glad they've been replaced - those were slow and unreliable, but they did work.
     
  18. DXoverDY macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    #18
    ya.. blasted thing cost me a fortune.. $550.. a 10 pack of blanks was like $30

    but my friends made up the cost by wanting "mix" cd's... that i'd charge $15 a pop for :p this was about... 8 years ago now i think.

    anyway.. i'm going to start a new thread for this old ancient tech.. since it's kinda offtopic here.. :p
     
  19. JeDiBoYTJ thread starter macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #19
    oh the memories :p

    now 5-6 years later, my Superdrive is less than a quarter of the size of that, and like 32x faster :p
     

Share This Page