MPG vs WMV
 

Okay,

I'm doing a poll of my members, but I want to ask the webmasters as well. I'm looking for actual experience here.

We're about to start encoding a LOT of video. Full Length stuff. We have done this in the past, in small offerings, encoding with Windows Media 9. And it's crystal clear.

However... there is a persistent idea that surfers prefer MPG 1, and Windows Media can't play on all platforms, and you get surfer problems specifically with Windows Media 9, etc. While I've never had a tech support request on those clips, I don't want to encode hundreds of hours of video into a format I'll regret.

So - let's hear it. What's the safest/best way to go on the below:

a. WMV for both high/low bandwidth surfers.

b. MPG1 for high bandwidth, with wmv for low bandwidth.

I have a pretty sweet (well, for what you're dealing with) 56k wmv config. So I could do MPEG1 for the high bandwidth guys.

But if it's not LIFE THREATENING -eg - paysite survivalwise - I'd prefer to stick with WMV.

Please give me your input.

I started with Mpg, then recently switched to WMV. Withing a week my members were asking to have Mpg back as some could view the movies, even though its a standard on Windows media player.

Personally I found WMV better than Mpg, but there are likely to be problems for your members alomng the way. Make sure you have a support page where you explain where they can download codecs, or better still stand alone WMV players. Apple users seem to have the problem with viewing these files more than PC owners.

I'd choose mpeg-2,
or divx .. .or xvid ? for better quality/compression ratio. It works in Win/linux, I don't know whether it works on mac too.
But it requires to install codec, which could be problem for total lamers

Apparently you don't run a paysite, or you wouldn't be referring to the people putting money in your pocket as lamers. I think it'd a bit of a stretch to force people to download a codec to watch your videos, but I do know some AVSes (or whatever they're called now) that use Xvid. It IS NOT standard, and isn't something I'd consider putting in our member's areas.

Fletcher,

I agree - I want an ease of use, broad platform compatability solution. What's your opinion on my question?

Loco - thanks for the input.

Magarita,

I'm sure you meant well. But the point of it all is that if you're running a paysite, you design for the lowest level of technical proficiency.

For the 'lamers', so to speak. :)

They can always go somewhere else, you know?

I make my members download Quicktime and they do. Not one complaint about it, ever. :thumbsup

vivo.

:1orglaugh

Best quality... MPG

Do not compare Apples with Bannas. If you encode a vid into wmv using the same properties as for an mpeg file, you can't see any differences, probably the wmv is a little bit better.
MPEG will be encoded mostly on VCD format with 1150kbits for video and 224kbits for audio. Just do the same for a wmv video and compare the results

i agree - comparing MPEG and WMV at the same bitrate - WMV is superior to my eyes. Many surfers and webmasters have this belief that MPEG is superior. The advantage to MPEG-1 is that everybody can play them and there is this notion among surfers that MPEG means higher quality.

If you're concerned about bandwidth on free galleries you could try asf as well. It has about the same size and quality as wmv but works with more media player versions than wmv.

But still, mpg is the one that everyone can play. If memory serves right nastydollars started out with asf on their movie galleries but switched to mpg after some time

This is your best bet
"b. MPG1 for high bandwidth, with wmv for low bandwidth. "

wmv 9 is much better as far as i'm concerned however, have had a few people with macs emailing because they can't play them.

:ak47: mac pc

do you members ever complain much?

:eyecrazy

My members only seem to want MPEG split into 10mb sections.

I give them both anyways MPEG and WMV

From an end-user stand point, I like wmv9 alot better.


From a producer stand point, I like wmv9 alot better.

Thanks everyone for the input.

I think I'll go with (b)

Just something to think about. Have you ever had a look to your server stats? How many users are using something else than Windows? 1.5%? Right? and how many of these Users are not Webmasters? 98%? So do you realy think the efforts and bandwith are reliable for this small percentage?

Dont laugh but i have a lot of members that like the flash movies better then mpg or wmv.

Yeah, but it's that 1.5% that clogs up my email with complaints - and posts on the internal messge board if I don't reply to their emails within 30 seconds of them sending it...

I need peace... harmony...

:)

Interesting aside... I posted a poll on our site about this. Granted, there are only 14 votes so far, but here are the results:

The question is "What do you prefer for video?"

Full Length Windows Media - 3
Full Length MPG - 3
Short Windows Media clips - 1
Want Full and Short Clips - 5
Don't Care - 2
On Dialup and Downloading Video Makes Me Cry - 1

By full length and short clips, I'm talking about encoding a full 30 minute scene as a 30 minute scene, while short clips would be chopping it up into 1-2 minute sections.

Interesting that they want both full and short clips, and thus far, MPG and WMV are neck and neck.

are you streaming mms? if not full length will suck, no ff ... and mpeg2, who the fuck said that? mpeg2 is dvd or svcd ...

give em both ... full length in wmv / mpg and chopped wmv / mpg ...

if mms, no reason to chop the wmv's ... just the mpgs for people on dialup