RealPlayer or VLC Media Player?

RealPlayer was created by RealNetworks in the mid 90s. It was never really a great program, but it worked and was still popular. I remember using it myself, although I don’t remember why I bothered. It was ugly to look at, had entirely too many pop up advertisements, and I remember there being security issues – going so far as to changing parts of your registry! I had honestly forgotten about this program for a long while and am still surprised to see it updated currently.

The newest version will allow you to use the program free for 30 days, after which you can pay a licencing fee of about $40, for premium features. There is a limited free version, which isn’t worth having, in my opinion, and two versions that sync with their cloud service. They have changed the name of the project to be RealTimes with RealPlayer. The prices for premium are $4.99 a month and $9.99 a month, for unlimited. It has advanced to being supported on PC, Macintosh, the Xbox One, and Mobile smartphones and tablets. You can also connect it with your Chromecast, Roku, and Kindle Fire, if you use it on the television. (RealNetworks, 2016)

The installation on the new program is still pretty aggressive and tries to force you into downloading other programs and toolbars, unless you are paying attention and unchecking those options.  There are also still plenty of advertisements getting thrown at you. I only tested the free version, so I’m not sure if those go away, if you choose to pay. No matter – personally I would still advise anyone looking for a media player to go elsewhere, as there are plenty of others to choose from that offer the same premium features, but for free.

VLC Media Player has been around for some time as well, but is an open source program. This program has much more you can customize and even allows the use of skins, which can make the player look and have the feel of other common programs or fun themes. My personal favourite is dressing it up like the Star Trek LCARS system, which I do with a lot of applications.

You can also play a LONG list of file extensions in this player compared to other programs in the market. As the program has had updates, I see that there are also many more features than when it first was created. You can bookmark certain areas in your playback as favourites, and utilize effects in the menu on any audio or video you might be playing to optimize it to your liking. (VideoLan, 2016)

VideoLan boasts that the program does not contain spyware or user tracking, which is a calming thought. There are also no hidden or bulky advertisements in the program – no ads at all! The program has even grown and evolved so much, that it is available on Android and iOS, in addition to all of the other operating systems it already is supported on. (VideoLan, 2016)

The VLC wiki shows all of the changes made to the project, gives general information, and breaks down any projects that are currently being worked on. You can support VLC in a number of ways, even if you’re not contributing by coding. They do a great job of breaking down these categories and providing examples of what you can do to participate, as well as provide you with the correct people to contact to get on board. (MediaWiki, 2016)

Sources:

 MediaWiki. (2016). Help VideoLAN. Retrieved from https://wiki.videolan.org/Help_VideoLAN/

 RealNetworks. (2016). Features. Retrieved from http://www.real.com/ca/features

 VideoLan. (2016). VLC media player. Retrieved from http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

Browsing: Mozilla Firefox and Internet Explorer

A requirement this week, was to specifically compare an open source browser to one that was not. For this post, I’m choosing to talk a bit about Mozilla Firefox (open source) and Internet Explorer.

While both of these browsers are essentially free, Firefox can be used on multiple operating systems to include Macintosh, Solaria, Linux, OS X, Windows, as well as for Android and iOS. Internet Explorer is provided and only available on computers running Microsoft Windows. As this is included on the system already, there is no need to download, unless you deleted it, or need an update. You will have to go through the download process with Firefox. It’s straightforward, however, and pretty quick.  Both browsers are also regularly updated; the last update was earlier this month. (Microsoft & Mozilla, 2016)

Speed-wise, Mozilla beats Internet Explorer. It also is less resource intensive. If you take a look at your task manager while you have each browser open looking at the same content in any one or multiple tabs, you can see these numbers for yourself.  Mozilla seems to take up less memory by a little less than half of that from Internet Explorer!

I spend a lot of time at the computer, and many hours using web browsers. While neither of these are my first choice, Mozilla is my second. If I have to spend this much time each day looking at pages in a browser, I do prefer that it be visually appealing to look at, to an extent. Mozilla is clean and offers plenty of customization, if using the desktop version. Personally I don’t know of anything that could be worse to look at and use than Internet Explorer. It’s quite plain, and many sites simply don’t look good viewing in it.

I currently haven’t upgraded to Windows 10 either. I read that Microsoft made a new browser: Edge, for this version going forward. Apparently it’s worse off than Internet Explorer is, even after initial updates. I won’t be going into more detail about that, as this post is to discuss Firefox versus Internet Explorer, but I thought I would at least mention it.  (Berls, 2016)

As far as Mozilla goes, there is a wiki page with information, a place to upload files, and history of changes that occur in the coding. While the main page hasn’t been updated in some time, the other relevant links are still currently active. I found it quite interesting that the community of coders hold a meeting every week. They also discuss various related projects and have official representatives who interact with contributors. There are even student ambassadors, who help promote all of the work Mozilla and the community are doing. (MediaWiki & Semantic MediaWiki, 2016)

Sources:

Berls, B. (2016). Microsoft Edge Is Windows 10’s Biggest Mistake. Retrieved from http://www.brucebnews.com/2016/04/microsoft-edge-is-windows-10s-biggest-mistake/

MediaWiki, & Semantic MediaWiki. (2016). Contribute/Coding. Retrieved August 18, 2016, from https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page

Microsoft. (2016). Popular Internet Explorer  Downloads. Retrieved from https://www.microsoft.com/en-ca/download/internet-explorer.aspx

Mozilla. (2016). Firefox – Desktop browser, Android, iOS, OS, Hello, Sync, Private Browsing. Retrieved from https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/products/

Gimp and Photoshop – Compare and Contrast

Both of these programs are photo editing software. While Gimp is open source and free to use, Photoshop can cost you hundreds of dollars to own. With the new Adobe Cloud system, you can also rent to use it monthly for less (although if you are a frequent user, it would waste money in the long run). While I have used Photoshop for many years, I did experiment with Gimp previously, and revisited it for this assignment. It seems that Gimp has done well growing and providing some important updates to keep it relevant to use. For those who are not familiar some of the features this open source program provides are:

• Edit photos
• Digital painting tools
• Animation (2D)
• Use of layers
• Customization options for toolbars
• Supports a variety of file types
• Allows the use of plug ins from third parties

Photoshop can go above and beyond these features, but for a hefty price. If you’re just getting into photo editing and manipulation, Gimp is a great start. While it is by no means an alternative to the professional software, it performs well for free program in it’s field. 

Compare and Contrasting

In terms of price, Gimp has Photoshop beat, as mentioned previously. Another big difference is the file size of the program. Gimp requires around 100 MB to download and double of that to run, Photoshop on the other hand is a whopping 1.4 GB to install initially, around 2+GB of updates after wards. Running Photoshop takes over 1GB of memory, which can slow down older computers as well, which is another positive to Gimp - it's light and non resource intensive.  

To keep it simple, the current version of Gimp has many of the same big main features that Photoshop does:

• Layers
• Text
• Filters
• Curves
• Cloning
• Levels
• Sharpening
• Healing
• History (to undo multiple actions)

as well as a few more. Photoshop comes in handy when you need more advanced features and tools. 

While I will continue to personally use Photoshop, as I have for so many years, I would have loved to have the current version of Gimp as a more affordable option when I first started using such a program. It's important to mention again that Gimp is open source, which means anyone can make changes and upload those changes for others to use. I'm willing to bet that further down the line, Gimp will continue to evolve and stay  relevant to those needing such software.