Frustrated With Bs

[Xanitus]

Originally posted by REALITY+16 April 2003 - 19:43--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (REALITY @ 16 April 2003 - 19:43)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -ShareDaddy@15 April 2003 - 15:24

Originally posted by -REALITY@15 April 2003 - 05:54

Originally posted by -Jibbler@15 April 2003 - 00:36
<!--QuoteBegin--strawz

@14 April 2003 - 13:42
Also, i heard BSplayer is better then Windows media, in respect to audio sync probles...any other players i should get, in case i cant get BS to work?

I wonder why all the hype about different players. Yes, they do have different features, but they won&#39;t play a movie any better or worse. The movie will play if you have the correct codecs, nothing more, nothing less.

True to a point but...
One example I could bring is VideoLan, has codec built as some others do.
If can&#39;t get XviD to work for you it&#39;ll do it bit it gets choppy.

Although with the correct codec lined up the best player with the least freezing, crashing,
will always be WMP (slightly), though I&#39;ve heard BS may load faster it is not as smOOth.
Players are actually all a waste if your only interest is to watch.

The only real issue and why people state to use another player is system resources. If a person has very little RAM using WMP is not the best, it uses more system resources than any other player. BS and Divx Lunacy use far less resources and for those who may have a system resource issue they are excellent alternatives. Both of you must understand that each PC is different, depending on the speed of the processor and the available amount of RAM different players may be essential. However all to often it is a codec issue, uninstalling all codecs and using the latest k-lite codec pack seems to be the best bet.

Good point, BS does take less resources. [/b][/quote]
I find it amusing how you quote quoted quotes

[RealitY]

Originally posted by Xanitus+17 April 2003 - 01:36--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Xanitus @ 17 April 2003 - 01:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -REALITY@16 April 2003 - 19:43

Originally posted by -ShareDaddy@15 April 2003 - 15:24

Originally posted by -REALITY@15 April 2003 - 05:54

Originally posted by -Jibbler@15 April 2003 - 00:36
<!--QuoteBegin--strawz

@14 April 2003 - 13:42
Also, i heard BSplayer is better then Windows media, in respect to audio sync probles...any other players i should get, in case i cant get BS to work?

I wonder why all the hype about different players. Yes, they do have different features, but they won&#39;t play a movie any better or worse. The movie will play if you have the correct codecs, nothing more, nothing less.

True to a point but...
One example I could bring is VideoLan, has codec built as some others do.
If can&#39;t get XviD to work for you it&#39;ll do it bit it gets choppy.

Although with the correct codec lined up the best player with the least freezing, crashing,
will always be WMP (slightly), though I&#39;ve heard BS may load faster it is not as smOOth.
Players are actually all a waste if your only interest is to watch.

The only real issue and why people state to use another player is system resources. If a person has very little RAM using WMP is not the best, it uses more system resources than any other player. BS and Divx Lunacy use far less resources and for those who may have a system resource issue they are excellent alternatives. Both of you must understand that each PC is different, depending on the speed of the processor and the available amount of RAM different players may be essential. However all to often it is a codec issue, uninstalling all codecs and using the latest k-lite codec pack seems to be the best bet.

Good point, BS does take less resources.

I find it amusing how you quote quoted quotes [/b][/quote]
Then you should find this even more amusing
Oh and don&#39;t PISS yourself while lauging so hard, ok.