DVD Transcoder comparison table by DVD Rankers

DVD Rankers did a transcoding applications comparison table…

WIN THE BEST!

http://www.geocities.com/metaphonic/dvdrank.htm

JiNeD

Who agrees they’ve got it right?
(And if not, why not?)

-Pete

It’s all about ease of use, quality, and free. DVD Shrink wins hands down.

So here, reassumed, the table:

BEST FOR SPEED:

1st DVD2ONE, seems fast as the light…almost realtime! wow!!
2nd DVD95Copy and CloneDVD running at the same speed for second place…
3rd DVDShrink and DVDXPress almost same (slow) speed
4th InstantCopy the slowest bastard…

BEST FOR VIDEO QUALITY:

1st InstantCopy, will give almost same quality as original! wow!!
2nd DVD95Copy, this underestimated little junky proggie rocks!
3rd DVDShrink probably can do better…
4th while CloneDVD, DvdXcopy and DVD2One are sucking at the same level

BEST FOR COMPATIBILITY WITH MOST DVD TITLES

1st InstantCopy, will manage to copy lots of stuff!
2nd DVDShrink and CloneDVD will bother the same (yet)
3rd DVD2One, DVD95 and DVDXcopy will keep crashing your computer at the same level…

BEST FOR FEATURES

1st DVDShrink, supposed the best for selective compression features
2nd CloneDVD, dont know why…but the say so…:slight_smile: maybe because of the fame got by CloneCD (well DIFFERENT program)
3rd all the rest…not the best…

LAST BUT NOT LEAST, EASE OF USE

1st place seems shared between DVD2ONE and DVDXCopy
that probably are both idiot-proof

A little little more complicated, if we can say so,
for evolved idiots are
DVDShrink, CloneDVD and DVD95copy…i suppose,
for his features of interaction with CopyToDVD! (WOW!)

As the say…Instantcopy is at the last place,
so, you have to be a damned genius to deal with
his messy advanced menus!!! :slight_smile:

So, our guys will give DVDShrink the virtual gold
medal for features, quality and first of all FREEdom :wink:

Second in line, to InstantCopy, that seems the most
stable in reauthoring without any problem and does
the better job in keeping the original quality
of the movie (very important factor)

CloneDVD will have to wait for many more releases
till fighting again for the podium !!!

JiNeD

Originally posted by jined
So here, reassumed, the table:
BEST FOR SPEED:

1st DVD2ONE, seems fast as the light…almost realtime! wow!!
2nd DVD95Copy and CloneDVD running at the same speed for second place…
3rd DVDShrink and DVDXPress almost same (slow) speed
4th InstantCopy the slowest bastard…

Question on the realtime part. Real time means 1:1. So if the movie is 90 minutes, it’ll take 90 minutes for DVD2One to encode. What?

Also, speed is based on lvl of compression. If you do lvl 1 compression on DVD Shrink it’ll take 15 min. For lvl 8, it’ll take 26 min. The fact that DVD2One only has one method of compression, to squeeze everthing into 4.38GB, and w/o the option to determine what compression lvl the user wants doesn’t make it number one.

I hate to say it, but this guy’s benchmarks is garbage and highly unorganized.

Thats why i had fun commenting this benchmarks!

Anyway, there was not written REALTIME anywhere, i wrote REALTIME for fun, on the original test there was written nothing…just number “9” in a rank 1 to 10.

And i didnt the benchmarks! Just posted the link
and commented their votes

:stuck_out_tongue:

JiNeD

I really like tables like these, lowest score for anything is 5, higest 8. Almost no comments on how they arrived at the figures and using what DVD’s etc. Anyone can come up with a different table with different DVD’s tested.

They also left CCE out, still used by a significant number of people genuinely interested in backing up thier own private collection.

I think the heading should have read DVD Wankers.

So apart from one or two things, you think it’s pretty cool eh?:wink:

-P

@ ChickenMan
ROTFLMAO :bigsmile: :bow:
Thats a killer remark, and one i would expect from you m8, nice one :cool:

Sorry CM m8, but what is CCE??? :bigsmile: :stuck_out_tongue: :bigsmile:

Now don’t mince your words next time you post m8, give it to us straight. :bigsmile:

You are of course correct (I know how much you love transcoding software) but what I did not get was that they awarded DVD Shrink “7” out of “10” for pic quality and it still won?!?!? :confused:

CCE.

DVD Shrink won because the comparison is not only about quality, but other features such as features, ease of use, and cost as well.

No Stoner, I know what CCE is really. Just having a little joke with my buddy CM. :wink:

I realise about the test results too, but how could it win anyway with pic Q of 7 in reality? I would have said a more accurate result would have been for pic Q.

  1. IC7 - 9

  2. Shrink 8

Test results, who needs them? :stuck_out_tongue:

Originally posted by Lazza
Now don’t mince your words next time you post m8, give it to us straight. :bigsmile:

I really had to restrain myself to even say that. I really find these type of senceless tables with data pulled out of someones a… a total waste of time. Unfortunately, the unwarey read it as gospel and follow its conclusion.

I have no real problem against transcoders, they have their purpose, I just dont like tables with no backup data to show how they arrived at the conclusion they did. Surely the Quality reading should have a greater weight than Ease of Use, then IC7 or DVD95Copy should be the winner.

I agree Lazza, how can a product with a Quality listed as 7 win above those that got 8 ? And if CCE was included on their scale of 1 to 10, it would have to be about 16 or more :stuck_out_tongue:

And finally, I wonder who actually “sponsored” the publishing of that table ?