Videos

[Alex Manly]

Any special reason why .mpeg, .wma, and .avi, are not allowed as attachments?

[Alex Manly]

bump

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I have bandwidth concerns. The chatbox is bandwidth intensive, I just changed the way counters work, another load on the server -- if dozens of people started watching videos I fear it would just be too much.

I am willing to hear any thoughts you have on the matter though.

Any special reason why .mpeg, .wma, and .avi, are not allowed as attachments?

[Alex Manly]

bandwith has always confused me.....would a video file of 1-2MB use up anymore bandwith then a picture file of the same size?

[Cindi Hammons]

bandwith has always confused me.....would a video file of 1-2MB use up anymore bandwith then a picture file of the same size?

Alex,

I really don't know the technology with playing mpegs online, but I can tell you that the size difference is really huge. None of the photos posted on NazNet are 1-2MB. In fact, at a ratio of 700X700, jpegs are usually around 60-100KB not MB, with 100KB being on the large size. So, generally, one could post 100+ photos for every 1MB of video posted. I think that is your big difference.

Cindi H.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Thanks for the explaination Cindi -- I think you know more about it than I do.


Alex,

I really don't know the technology with playing mpegs online, but I can tell you that the size difference is really huge. None of the photos posted on NazNet are 1-2MB. In fact, at a ratio of 700X700, jpegs are usually around 60-100KB not MB, with 100KB being on the large size. So, generally, one could post 100+ photos for every 1MB of video posted. I think that is your big difference.

Cindi H.