Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (52547)	8/27/2001 2:00:20 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

I think they should include lame encoder....that and fraunhofer are the most popular .mp3 encoders... As far as video...the Athlon holds it's own despite a 600 Mhz disadvantage. A 1.5 palomino will even the score with the 2 GHz P4 and likely do better... Jim...

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (52547)	8/28/2001 2:21:09 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

wbmw, What makes you say that? Do you have definitive proof that these programs are more widely used than Microsoft's Media Encoder? I don't believe Microsoft's Media Encoder is capable of creating a quality MP3, rendering it completely useless to anyone who cares about encoding stuff. I don't know anyone using Microsoft's wma format. I have not been doing much with music related stuff for a while, and I don't know what the lasest Media Encoder (7.1?) but I found the version before that (7.0?) useless for encoding. Last time I researched this stuff, I found Lame encoder to be the best (/most popular) for lossy compression, and APE for lossless compression. Now I have no idea how Athlon performs vs. P4 using useful encoders, and it is entirely possible that P4 leads Athlon by similar margin, and I would be curious about the results, but the results of Windows Media Encoder are completely useless for me. Joe