# Why isn't real media (.rm) used more often?

**URL:** https://forum.kirupa.com/t/why-isnt-real-media-rm-used-more-often/121616
**Category:** Uncategorized
**Created:** [September 4, 2004, 4:54pm UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/why-isnt-real-media-rm-used-more-often/121616 "2004-09-04T16:54:44Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![mlk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e56c9b/32.png) [@mlk](https://forum.kirupa.com/u/mlk)
#### Post date: [September 4, 2004, 4:54pm UTC](https://forum.kirupa.com/t/why-isnt-real-media-rm-used-more-often/121616/1 "2004-09-04T16:54:44Z")

</div>

Well, after playing endlessly with AE and rendering with a gazillion type of codecs, I came to the conclusion that people overlook realmedia (rm files) too much ! I know that most people think that rm files are sluggish to download (who hasn’t had a 1/2hour of ‘buffering’ for his videos) but here’s a test render I did:

Gif: **130 kb**  
 ![](http://forum.kirupa.com/uploads/kirupa/754/1a8c11a1ea208c32.gif)

Quicktime mov files (sorenson 3, okay quality, **not** the best): _ **165 kb** _

[http://www.mlkdesign.online.fr/files/kirupa/m\_mov.mov](http://www.mlkdesign.online.fr/files/kirupa/m_mov.mov)

and Realmedia rm file, encoded to a pretty good quality: a mere **31 kb**!  
[http://www.mlkdesign.online.fr/files/kirupa/m\_rm.rm](http://www.mlkdesign.online.fr/files/kirupa/m_rm.rm)

So I’m beginning to wonder why people post (for example movie screeners) in a .mov format…