vgoklani said:Version 3.x is much better, but you need to do some digging to find it - and it is a univeral binary. Handbrake does NOT remove the region encoding.
risc said:By digging to you mean donate to the site to download it? Or by digging do you mean look on a torrent site?
vgoklani said:again, handbrake doesn't rip DVDs, it just converts the format...as for mactheripper, verion 3 will not be free(!), the author has been fairly adamant about that....
macgeek2005 said:I think that's considered "ripping".
It's not slow because of Rosetta. It's slow because of the drive. 😉7on said:Is there any freeware alternatives to MacTheRipper? I have 2.6.6 but I hear the Universal version will be shareware. The PPC version is rather slow under Rosetta and I was just curious about deCSS alternatives.
Thanks.
So I'm not ripping my CDs when I'm importing them into iTunes just because I use aac and not aiff...? 😕wrc fan said:I would consider that converting. Why because it is no longer the same format...
Eidorian said:It's not slow because of Rosetta. It's slow because of the drive. 😉
I remember another Intel user running MacTheRipper using a 16x external firewire DVD and getting nearly identical ripping times under native PowerPC and Rosetta.
7on said:Really? It felt slower than my G4 Tibook at ripping. But actual tests versus my "feelings" is kinda moot.
On my MacBookPro 2.0Ghz, it takes about 30 minutes to rip a DVD using MacTheRipper. It's marginally faster than my 800 Mhz G4 (which takes 35 min), but I find that the biggest speed difference has nothing to do with the processor or the memory (although I wouldn't try it on a G3), but rather the DVD drive it's hooked up to. (I used a external FW DVD drive)
MTR does run through Rosetta, but the speed diff wasn't noticable for me -- a few minutes faster on Intel than on 800 Mhz G4.
MTR works at a reasonable speed on Intel-based new machines... primarily because ripping requires very limited processing, it's mostly about reading and writing.
Overall speed of ripping a DVD is a function of several things of which processor performance is only one. Main factors that affect the observed speed include the ability of DVD reader to extract the information and the speed with which the hard drive can store this information (slower bus speed of older machines can make things a little worse even with a newer faster DVD and hard drive).
Perhaps the slow speed of ripping you are observing is more of a function of your DVD-player/writer and has little to do with the MTR or anything else. In my case, using a 2GHz MacBook, the internal Superdrive (or whatever they are calling it now) takes twice as long to rip a DVD as using an external FW Pioneer 110... all else being identical, about 24 min using internal DVD drive versus about 11 min using the external drive for a 4.2GB disk.
7on said:I want to rip straight video_TS then I can use my Popcorn 2 software to compress and burn. Popcorn doesn't handle .movs
Rocksaurus said:Drag the video_TS folder from the DVD to your hard drive?
You have to rip them first to get past the Macrovision or CSS encryption/protection. You rip them using MacTheRipper and then Popcorn can handle them just fine.Rocksaurus said:Drag the video_TS folder from the DVD to your hard drive?
Mitthrawnuruodo said:So I'm not ripping my CDs when I'm importing them into iTunes just because I use aac and not aiff...? 😕
LinkWikipedia said:Ripping is the process of copying the audio or video data from one media form, such as Digital Versatile Disc (DVD) or Compact Disc (CD), to a hard disk. While the original media is typically digital, the extraction of analog media such as VHS video or vinyl records to a digital format can also be referred to as "ripping". To conserve storage space, the copied data is often then encoded in a compressed format such as MP3, WMA or Ogg Vorbis for audio, or MPEG-2, MPEG-4, DivX, Xvid or Ogg Theora for video.
The key word there is "then." By the use of the word "then" it is saying that after it has been ripped it is then usually encoded (which isn't actually correct, as it's already encoded, it is being re-encoded, but I won't get into all the inaccuracies that wikipedia contains). Also I have never ever heard Analog to Digital conversion refered to as "ripping." Digitizing, yes. Ripping, no.Mitthrawnuruodo said: