Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Some more reports for comparison' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Some more reports for comparison
Authored by: osxpounder on Feb 24, '09 10:39:31AM

For those interested in comparing screen capture software:

The ability to modify the cursor highlights is included in iShowU (for both left and right clicks). I've used that feature.

I know of no video effects in iShowU. iShowU lacks a video editing interface and that cool ability of SF to extract a window/dialog box as if it were on its own layer.

I have moved captured video from Intel to PPC machines and continued working without problems. I think this may be because the files iShowU exported used my choice of QT-compatible codecs.

On my Mac Pro, iShowU is stable and reliable, whereas ScreenFlow is not. SF crashes now & then.

Snapz Pro X 2 crashes often, too, usually at the worst time: it either crashes during export (losing all your work, forcing a reshoot), or it exports a file that won't open in QuickTime. Since the export takes so long, that's a very bad time to discover that Snapz has failed.

Anyone's experience may vary; this has been mine. I used Snapz a lot, till iShowU, then iShowU often. I've only used the demo version of SF. It's too expensive for my needs, because I already have 2 or 3 video editors: QT Pro, iMovie, and Final Cut Studio. For those who lack an editing program, SF may be a better choice.



[ Reply to This | # ]