Faith or Reality?

[RyLoS]

I still dont understand why on a site like your (doom9.org) that has always been 1 point of reference for DIVX or generic mpeg4 creation you continue support ONLY an outdated program (gordianknot), i think there is nothing bad on this though, but at least you can put news or even guides on the super-new and functional DVX program, thats is already in an advanced state for DivX5.03/5.04, XVID, VP3, DivX5.02 creation.
IMHO your site has always supported the video community, so contiuning this great thread i think it is correct to put a word on DVX not only the alpha_staging of the new gordianknot.

I know theWEF made a program that started us all this type of dream, i used gknot from the times to make my divx, but as us all know time ago development stopped and me like others (i think) needed the possibilities to use new codec versions, on this DVX is really good.

All of us must think on this....
Let me know what you think

PS
Sorry for my english.

[stax76]

everybody knows Doom9 is not a friend to .NET but a good one to TheWef and Gordian Knot since day one but I don't think this is a reason to ignore DVX. I can tell this because I'm in contact with him for a while. I did not announce/suggest DVX 3.0 at Doom9 because I want to finish the beta test which will be very soon the case.


thats is already in an advanced state for DivX5.03/5.04, XVID, VP3, DivX5.02


the latest Gordian Knot version saves and retrieves the whole registry key of the codec so you can expect XviD support for Gordian Knot pretty soon. This method has many advantages for instance a new codec can be added in five minutes and it is 100 % reliable don't matter which version or build of the codec is used. A disadvantage is the codec must save all his settings in the registry, the Microsoft codec doesn't save at all and XviD don't save the CPU settings. I reported this already to the codec developers so let's hope future versions will support it

[bb]

As you may have noticed, GordianKnot development has been restarted, this time as an open source project. And robot4rip from the same author has just been released. There's even a new GordianKnot Development forum available now.

I agree with you that DVX deserves more publicity. I guess it's as popular as GordianKnot because you need to install the .Net package (I think ~20MB download). I assume that's the reason why Dolomite has some problems in promoting his software.

There's another competitor around: DVDtoOGM. GordianKnot-style interface, but focused on OGM creation. Great tool, too!

bb

[stax76]

I agree with you that DVX deserves more publicity. I guess it's as popular as GordianKnot because you need to install the .Net package (I think ~20MB download). I assume that's the reason why Dolomite has some problems in promoting his software.


a lot people complain about .NET but who wonders when
nobody knows what it is and what the windows future will
look like. I always thought this is a problem but since
3.0 RC 1 was released the feedback is very positive, there
are a lot new users everyday without any adverising. I don't
advertise for DVX because only experienced users can
help us to finish the beta test. Right now we have a big
sync problem and still DirectShow problems

[N_F]

Originally posted by Dolemite
a lot people complain about .NET but who wonders when
nobody knows what it is and what the windows future will
look like.
I can certainly see your point. But it still makes you wonder: There are countless of programs that do great without .NET, why don't yours? (I realise I probably sound a bit harsh with those last words, please know that is not my intention, I just can't find better words for it at the moment)

[RyLoS]

N_F you "can" have right but now read this:

there -were- lot of programs that were great on DOS, why dont we write for dos then?

Im a C# sharp developer so i know what .Net framework is and what Microsoft wanna do...
If you really hate .Net and so the future of windows (or hate microsoft itself) then use Linux, there are thousands of great programs for linux.

I dont know if i explain in well manner my point of view, but i dont know all english words, sorry ;)

[stax76]

There are countless of programs that do great without .NET, why don't yours?


Delphi is the only alternative to rapidly develop a GUI application. To be honest I don't see a bright future for Delphi. It was superior to VB6 and C++/MFC on various developing aspects but since .NET the only advantage I see is speed but when I need speed I rather stick to C++ and assembly and .NET is not really slow. Borland knows about the future of .NET so there will be Delphi for .NET soon but VB always was the language with the most users and Delphi with very few users (although VB6 sucks big time compared to Delphi) and with the .NET situation I doubt Delphi will become more popular because there is no big advantage any longer because in .NET the language don't matter. .NET is .NET and C family languages were always the most important languages so besides C++ and Java and various others with C# there is another great language. DVX already uses a couple of things that would not be possible with Delphi. .NET's biggest advantages is language independence (as long it is a .NET language), DVX plugins are written with different languages, currently I know about VB and C#. DVX uses C# and VB compiler services proivided by the framework so plugins can be compiled with DVX. There are a lot other advantages (MS VisualStudio IDE is much better than any other IDE) and also disadvantages but I never worked with Delphi so I can't tell. If somebody had told me how bad VB6 is compared to Delphi I would be a Delphi developper myself. You can also read various other postings by me posted in this board where I explain different aspects of .NET. After reading all this and still having second thoughts then I must say maybe Linux is the right for you but .NET programs already run under Linux under Mono plattform I'm worried.

[Doom9]

I have been looking into divx/xvid tools other than gknot, I have tested an earlier beta of DVX 3 and I have communicated with the author several times, outlining what I think is missing.
I'm not fixed on GKnot in any way, but it was the tool where I had some influence on the development process and where the developer shared my views of a where a program should go (see r4r). And, you're not going to throw something reliable and proven overboard when there's no suitable alternative. During my tests I experienced several problems with DVX which are very likely related to the .NET platforms (repeated crashes and such) and that's not very confidence inspiring.
I'm a JAVA and C programmer myself and I know the beauty of simplified programming languages (though I kinda view VB as a macro programming language destined to control World and Excel rather than to write complex programs), yet every platform that requires some special "sub platform" like a JVM or a .NET runtime environment will have a difficult time to prevail and not every hyped product really has to make it (I doubt Office is written for the .NET environment... makes you wonder why ;)
Now I haven't stopped looking around but so far I haven't seen the ultimate tool yet but I'll keep looking. You'll soon be able to read here what I think a divx/xvid tool should do and how it should be done.. then if you know any such program you can point it out, if not, mabye somebody will program it.
Bottom line, I haven't come accross a tool that is significantly better than GKnot while being just as reliable.

[stax76]

I'm a JAVA and C programmer myself and I know the beauty of simplified programming languages (though I kinda view VB as a macro programming language destined to control World and Excel rather than to write complex programs), yet every platform that requires some special "sub platform" like a JVM or a .NET runtime environment will have a difficult time to prevail and not every hyped product really has to make it (I doubt Office is written for the .NET environment... makes you wonder why


VB6/VBA/VBScript is a joke compared to .NET, no class library, no OOP and big COM dll's. The birth of .NET was Microsoft was working on a successor for COM, when they realized they have so much more then a successor of COM the called it .NET. I don't know when the next office version was or will be released, what's it called and if it requires the framework. What I know for sure is future versions will require and incl. the framework like all future Microsoft product. Microsoft won't port millions of lines Office C++ code to .NET but they work with .NET, the .NET class library is implemented with MSIL code and wide parts of VisualStudio. A key technology in both Office and .NET is XML. Office programming VBA (Visual Basic for applications) which technically is VB6/COM based will be replaced with the scripting engine provided by the .NET framework (Microsoft.VSA namespace). Currently only two languages are supported by the scripting engine but it will be more in the future

[Doom9]

here's that infamous document: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50339

Now, in recent weeks I've had looks at DVX, DVD2OGM, Autodub and DivX5enc,performed tests and given feedbacks to the authors (in most cases) so you really can't say I'm just sitting on GKnot. Autodub and DivX5Enc have also been featured in the news.
And GKnot is still the most popular tool in this area so it makes sense that it gets the best coverage.

Recently with r4r we have a tool that does the demuxing part the way I think it should be done (hence the immediate guide changes), but there's no equivalent for the encoding and putting it together part.

[ukb008]

There is no question that GKnot has a history; it almost started the avalanche. DVD > mpeg4 encoding really started to become commonplace after GKnot's advant.

Let's not compare GKnot with other programs. One chooses what one likes in a free world. What I personally found enriching in the use of GKnot is the amount of insight one gains in the process of its use; it is so educative. It doesn't spoonfeed. It gives you the controls, and lets you call the shots. Ultimately, when the use of the tool results in a video that is as wonderful as you have wanted it to be, you know that it's your handiwork and it's because you have used the beautiful tool well. Perhaps other tools are there that also offer controls, but what I feel sure is that GKnot started it all, and there are only followers.

Programs like AGK are engineering marvels, and produce the most excellent results in a dispassionate way. The philosophy is fundamentally different there. AGK is a tightly riveted and armored piece of program with two holes: one for input and the other for output. The word 'Auto' in its name presupposes the presence of no other holes. Any such holes cropping up are to be patched up with alacrity, and perhaps rightly so. GKnot, on the other hand, has so many counters where helpful recipients are sitting for input.

It is possible that in this present era of two-minute noodles and fast foods, where encoding is finished within three hours or less as opposed to what it took us when we started with it, GKnot will find less and less takers because the counters/controls will be viewed more and more as hassles, but the one thing that is needed to be stressed here is that time spent with GKnot will be rewarding in many ways than one can imagine.

Lastly, I try to remember that GKnot is a pie (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7770) which a friendly neighbor has come to our doorstep and rang the bell and presented to us.

Regards.

[Doom9]

@ukb008: considering that the thread has been dormant for more than a year, it might've been the best thing to let it rest.

[len0x]

two years actually :)