Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout
Maybe the whole purpose was to make it difficult to burn to CD, so people couldn't bootleg it and sell it on eBay/Japanese Yahoo/whatever?
|
Its still very easily possible to burn it to CD but that would result in a loss of quality, because CDs use 44.1khz and this audio uses 48khz.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TheBang
They'd have to be HUGE cheapskates, considering QuickTime is free.  |
PC users who don't with to install Quicktime 7 can choose to install
QuicktimeAlternative which isnt as CPU/memory intensive as the Apple player and doesnt continously bug you to upgrade to Quicktime Pro. The benefits and download link are listed on the URL above.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TheBang
Not that I want to contribute to the bitrate debate, but the 2 videos are practically identical. The codecs are the same (H.264/AAC), and the only difference is the container (QuickTime vs. MPEG-4). Because iPods, QuickTime, and iTunes can play H.264/AAC in either container, it was really only necessary to include one of the videos (either one). That could have saved 10 MB in the archive size which perhaps could have gone to a 192 Kbps MP3.
|
If Underworld's service provider is charging them for bandwidth usage then reducing the archive size by 10mb per download makes a bigger difference than the upgrade to 192kbps/44.1khz.