Playing a file faster than the normal speed

How do you play a file on quicktime at 1.5 the normal speed?

Open the A/V Controls window (Window menu).

Similar Messages

Why is the log larger than the normal mdf file

I have SAP installation that has a log that is more than ten times larger than the normal mdf file. This rapid growth happen in the past year. running 8.81

Hi,
Please check SAP note:
625546
- Size of transaction log file is too big
1651592 - Unable to reduce the size of the Log file
Thanks & Regards,
Nagarajan

Is the Gig version really faster than the 100m version !?

I just upgraded my 100 meg AEBS to the new Gig version, and ran a quick n easy benchmark, an rsync -e ssh on a 150 meg file. The server is an iMac connected via gig-e, and the Macbook c2d is connected via 802.11n (reporting a consistant 300 mbps in network utility - about 20 feet from the router, going through 2-4 sheets of drywall). The tests were conducted in my Chicago apartment, with at least 10 detectable 2.4gHz networks, and no 5.8gHz networks that I know of.
The 802.11n 5.8gHz no backwards compatibility was by far the fastest. The fastest test I ran was 11 MBps on the copy, with 802.11a compatibility I believe was around 8, and 2.4ghz + 802.11g compatibility was around 6. I repeated all tests a few times, the results were pretty consistant.
These results suprised me, as I was really hoping for a bit faster. I could get 40 MBps on my Linux file server over gig-e to the iMac in previous tests. Unfortunately that machine is down until I get some replacement parts, so I couldn't use it to test the new AEBS. But I seem to remember getting 11 or 12 MBps with the Linux file server over the old AEBS with 100m and 5.8gHz no backwards compatiblity.
So how much of the performance non-difference is due to the iMac vs Linux file server, or the Gig-E version being no faster than the 100 meg version remains to be seen. I'm curious if anyone else has done tests.
If the router, or this 802.11n implementation is the bottleneck - folks may not want to waste their money upgrading, unless they really want that 4 port (in bridge mode) gig-e switch on the back.
Rob

That is somewhat counterintuitive, as the 802.11n connection speed is reportedly 300 mbps. I understand the implications of protocol overhead, but 70% overhead seems a bit excessive. I guess I'm curious if the bottleneck is:
- in the router backplane
- in the 802.11n protocol
- in apples implementation of 802.11(draft)n
Also - anyone else have actual benchmark data to share?
regards
Rob

Audigy2 NX :Sampled audio is faster than the origi

Sampled audio at 6 bits is faster than the original soundtrack
I'm using Sonar 2.2 and when I use My Audigy 2NX USB2 with 2 audio tracks,
I'm recording on the second one while listening the first one :
-No problem with my AC/97 sound card
- Problem occur with my audigy 2 NX (Sampled audio becomes faster (Timing not adequate) while listening to the recording , the first 0 seconds seems in exact timing, then after I feel that the recorded begins to take speed and then ends second before the track one !!!
I Solved the problem partially by using CoolEdit instead of Sonar and in the Setting-Multitrack Tab, i activated "correct for drift in recording"
Please Help !!!
Thanks
Dany D.
Message Edited by waize2 on <SPAN class=date_text>0-7-2004 <SPAN class=time_text>03:5 AM
Message Edited by waize2 on 0-7-2004 03:52 AM

First try to play your video on the PC. Use Quicktime 7 and it should work.
If it does the same thing on the PC then the video encoding has created this problem. Nothing wrong in the phone. You will need to re-encode. May I enquire as to which software you are using to encode?
If it plays correctly on the PC then your best bet is to lower the bitrate or the frame rate of the video, re-encode, transfer and try again.
I recommend using h263 as the video codec as this will be "safer" to use. Try 3gp extension format as well.
640K Should be enough for everybody
El_Loco Nokia Video Blog

Is the Core i7 processor comparable, much slower, or faster than the 2.8 Ghz core 2 duo from 2009?

I am looking to get a new MacBook Air, but when looking at the prices I am seeing the MacBook Pro 13" for the same price and a lot more guts (RAM and Processor). I am ok with spending the amount of money on the air if it means I get a computer that is like my iPad, which i love (flash based, snappy), but don't want it to be super slow.
I am coming off of a 17" 2.8Ghz MacBook Pro from 2009. I was happy with the speed and power of that machine. The most taxing thing I did was make a complilation of family movies in iMovie and burned them with iDVD once in the 2 years of ownership.
I mostly browse the internet and compose written documents, and keynote presentations.
I know my questions may seem stupid, but I don't know how significant the changes between i7 and Core 2 Duo are, so I ask the question:
I am wondering if the processing power in the core i7 will be somewhat comparable, much slower, or faster than the 2.8 Ghz Core 2 Duo I had in my 2009 computer?
Thanks for any help!!

Hi brosephb,
Like you I went through a similar comparison process. I bought the MacBook air 13" and up specced the processor and memory. I don't do anything taxing enough or frequently enough to NEED the extra power of the MacBook pro.
I am overjoyed at my air. It's gorgeous, the way it wakes instantly, it's speed and it's portableness is so endearing that I just don't use my iPad anymore. I read numerous reviews on it and the overwhelming opinion was it's addictive ease of use because of it's slim, light and rapid waking. At work I can hold the air with one hand, open it rapidly at will. It's just great but it's made my iPad redundant (for me anyway).
I see the new airs are even faster and I'm tempted to consider selling my 6 month old air and getting the new one, but, it runs a dream so I am happy to just be envious of the new one.
In short, unless you need the power (for your work) go for the air. I'm looking at a new iMac to use as a home work station. For the price of a new air I can get an iMac that will swallow any task for a good few years to come. And my air will suffice as my mobile companion. However, that's just me spoiling myself as, at the moment, I have no teal need for another mac. I may get the cinema display for any long winded tasks, as the screen size will help with multiple tasking.
A bit of a ramble, hope this is useful.

Under the settings app there's the general column and under the accessibility section the is a setting called black over white does that drain your battery any more than the normal setting

Under the settings app there's the general column and under the accessibility section the is a setting called black over white does that drain your battery any more than the normal setting

Wow. I have not seen that question nor a discussion. I agree with James. I don't think it will, and if the power drain is different, maybe it'll be less and not more.
With a 10 hour battery, you have plenty of time to test it and see. If the battery depletes fast, just go back to the other way.
If you do try it, let us know what you discover.
Thanks ! !

I just upgraded my Internet service to 12 MPS. It doesn't appear to work any faster than the 3MPS I had before. The AT

I just upgraded my Internet service to 12 MPS. It doesn't appear to work any faster than the 3MPS I had before. The AT&T guy said it may be the computer rather than the connection. I have an iMac intel core 2 duo, running OS 10.5.8. It has 1 GB of memory. I have plenty of memory left. Is there something I can check on the computer to see if it's capable of running faster with this new Internet upgrade?

You certainly are going to see improvements if you download big files, i.e. Apple updates, or watching trailers also at higher resolution.
You won't see much difference if you use peer to peer download.

2011 MBP - why is the optical port faster than the hard drive port?

In looking at an earlier discussion (April I think) I found a screen grab that showed a 15" MBP with a 6.0Gbp/s hard drive connection and a 3.0Gbp/s optical bay connection. That is image number one below.
Images two and three are from my brand new MBP 17". Can someone please explain the Link Speed and Negotiated Link Speed differnces? What is the 1.5 Gbp/s about?
I would appreciate any input guys.
Thanks!
Hugh

Why did Apple change this?
9-pin FireWire ports use FireWire 800, which is faster than the old 6-pin FireWire 400 ports.
Is there an adapter I can buy so that I can backup my Macbook?
Yes.
(48784)

The 15-inch unibody is faster than the 17-inch unibody flagship?

Macworld benchmarks has the 15 edging out the 17.
And that is Before yesterday's speedbump for the 15.
http://www.macworld.com/article/139139/2009/03/unibody17_inch_macbookpro.html
When they remeasure, will the 15 be substantially faster than the 17-inch flagship?

Historically, the 17-inch has been faster and better in many ways.
I'm sorry, but this is simply incorrect. I will present for you the following specifications from every MBP revision. All specifications represent the high-end 15" and stock 17" of the time which are the two models we are comparing here.
MacBook Pro (Early 2006, Original Revision)
15.4"/2.16 Ghz (CTO)/1 GB RAM/100GB/256 MB VRAM/$2499
17"/2.16 Ghz/1 GB RAM/120 GB HD/256 MB VRAM/$2799
Macbook Pro (Late 2006)
15.4"/2.33 GHz/2 GB RAM/120 GB HD/256 MB VRAM/$2499
17"/2.33 GHz/2 GB RAM/160 GB HD/256 MB VRAM/$2799
Macbook Pro (Mid 2007)
15.4"/2.4 GHz/2 GB RAM/160 GB HD/256 MB VRAM/$2499
17"/2.4 GHz/2 GB RAM/160 GB HD/256 MB VRAM/$2799
Macbook Pro (Early 2008)
15.4"/2.5 GHz/6 MB L2/2 GB RAM/250 GB HD/512 MB VRAM/$2499
17"/2.5 GHz/6 MB L2/2 GB RAM/250 GB HD/512 MB VRAM/$2799
I think it is pretty evident that in terms of clockspeed, RAM, and VRAM the 15" and 17" have never been too far apart. I don't think 20-40GB of HD space is all that big a deal. Yes, the 17" has had an extra USB/FW port. I don't know if these things qualify as "faster and better in many ways" though. Really, the most significant way that the 17" was "better" was the screen size and resolution as has already been mentioned. Things are no different now than they've been for the last three years. I don't know what they were like in the PPC days because I don't have time to look back that far, but I don't think it matters.
In fact it's slower, and will seem even slower with the 15's speed bump.
It's not slow at all. In fact, it's one of the fastest notebooks that you can buy at all right now. We have already pointed out that you shouldn't take the benchmarks seriously because they have absolutely no statistical significance.
These things are not going to change. If you need the notebook now, you should buy it. If you don't need it, then wait. If you don't want it, then buy something else.
--Travis

SWF to play mp3 files located on the server

Hello,
Does anyone know if it is possible to create an SWF file that can play mp3 files directly from the server, without the need for a streaming media server or external JS.
And also for the application to read the current directory its located in and build a playlist based on the files inside.
any information of examples would be greatly appreciated.
Peter.

As for loading and playing the files there is no issue. Simply load them as you would load any file. You can even use a relative path if they are in the same folder as the SWF, or a sub-folder that is in the folder with the SWF.
As for looking at the server directory for what files are there, and using them - I know of no way to do this. That doesn't mean it is impossible, just that I haven't come across a method in my experience.
What I typically do is to archive the list of files in an XML file, and load the XML. I know, that adds an extra step, and an extra file, but it is the easiest method for approximating what you want to do.
Let me edit this response.
You could use javascript, or a server language to grab the list of files in the directory and pass it into Flash via the ExternalInterface classes.

How do I get an iPod touch to turn on other than the normal way. It has been dropped and all I can get is a blank screen. Have tried holding the HOME button down for 30 sec. but that didn't work.

How does one get an iPod nano to turn on other than the "normal" way? This one has been dropped and all I can get is a blank screen. I have tried holding down the HOME button to restart it but no go. When I connect it to my computer, I am told to enter the PASSCODE which I cannot do as there is no touchpad.

David ..
Your topic refers to an iPod touch
Then you say: How does one get an iPod nano to turn on ......
If it's an iPod touch, try a reset.
Press and hold the Sleep/Wake button and the Home button together for at least ten seconds, until the Apple logo appears.
If that doesn't help, whether it's an iPod nano or touch, it probably needs service > Apple - Support - Service Answer Center

Is the iPad 3 faster than the iPad 2?

Hi,
Is the iPad 3 faster than the iPad 2? Also, how much better resolution is the iPad 3 from the iPad 2? I was just wondering because I heard that the new iPad isn't worth it's price.

The New iPad is not remarkably faster, but does have a faster chip, which is required to handle the amazing Retina display. The new display on New iPad is without question significatly better than iPad 2 and offers nearly 4 times the resolution of iPad 2. Whether it's important to you, only you can know. To see the difference, go to an Apple store where they still sell iPad 2 and New iPad. For me, the difference was night and day, which is why I sold my iPad 2 and upgraded to New iPad.

Why is the version file smaller than the original file, although I didn't make changes in the file? And why is the keywords don't exporting with original files?

Hi! Why is the version file smaller than the original file, although I didn't make changes in the file? And why is the keywords don't exporting with original files?

Wild guess: you're using the the wrong export settings. You'll need to tell us more before we can help you - like the export settings you're usng, the size and format of the originals etc.

Will my duel 800 G4 work with Leopard? Its fast than the 867 G4?

My duel 800 G4 was the top of the line when I purchased it, much faster than the 867 G4, which seems to be the limit on the new Leopard operating system. Will I still be able to upgrade? I have seen on other Apple forums many people asking the same question? I would appreciate any help.

Well, the minimum system requirements that Apple tells us really aren't always totally truthful. For example, they say OS 10.4 needs a minimum 256 MB Ram, and a DVD drive. That isn't true. I have tested this on a few different machines and found that the true minimum requirements are 192 MB for installation, 128 MB for running. On an ibook G3 500 mhz with 128 MB RAM, 10.4 ran surprisingly well. It was a little laggy of course, but it was stable and reliable. Also, you do not need a DVD drive, as you can use target disk mode to install the system from another computer (yes, the other computer needs a dvd drive...but I am speaking in specifics). What they say in their requirements is for the general public, but most of the time they aren't entirely dogmatic on those requirements.
If it were my guess, I would say 10.5 will probably run on your system. If they entirely cutoff installation based on clockspeed, I'm guessing some mac-hacker will figure it out.
Also, as far as your computer being top of the line "when you bought it"-that's the issue. Basically everyone's mac was top of line or near top of the line at it's release. But we all know the computer industry is not a slow moving market. Your computer can be outdated in a few months or a year. I helped a guy buy his first mac a few months ago (imac). 2 days later Apple released the new imac. That's the nature of computers. And you really can't expect Apple to keep supporting machines approaching 7 years old (my ol' Gigabit). They want to be at the head of the market, and pushing the old out is some times the only way to do it.
You always have the option to upgrade your system. Go and look at some cpu upgrade cards. They aren't all that expensive. For $400 I turned my dual 450 to a dual 1.4 Ghz (and don't forget the level 3 cache). Third party upgrades are what keep us old timers goin.

I installed the ios 5.0.1 and now suddenly close apps and battery dies faster than the ios5!

I installed the ios 5.0.1 and now suddenly close apps and battery dies faster than the ios5!
we need the 5.0.2 or 5.1 ios quickly!
thks

A few people that post here have said they are having trouble with there battery life. As for the apps crashing, have you reset you iPad , it may help.

Playing a file faster than the normal speed

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for