Roll up, roll up, get your DivX Certified device here today...

[DigitAl56K]

Just a quick note to say that we updated our Hardware page over on DivX.com today:

http://www.divx.com/hardware/

Here you will find a lot of information about DivX Certified devices, and where you can go to purchase them. With some units selling for as little as $60-$70, its time to get your DivX collection off your PC and on to your TV folks!

Aside from DivX Certified DVD players, we also have certified encoding hardware, and other devices.

Expect more devices and more sales sites to pop up in the near future!

</plug>

[bond]

when will dxn start to push and certify players (with a special certification) able to handle the full mpeg-4 advanced simple profile @ level 5?

the limitations of the current certification (aiming at the compatibility with weak chips, not with strong ones) dont reflect the power of the last 2 chips anymore by far

[SeeMoreDigital]

I have to agree with bond here!

It's all well and good encouraging people to buy DivX certified players but when we asked thekid about DXN's future plans regarding Mpeg4, the question went unanswered.

Our questions about support for Mpeg4's generic container (MP4) also went unanswered.

Correct me if I'm wrong but was in DivX who introduced packed bitstream encoding. An implementation that some 'non DivX certified' stand-alones have trouble with and limits compatibility with the generic container. And was it DivX who introduced 1 warp-point GMC, an implementation that is arguably 'next-to-useless'.

It seems that while Mpeg4 technology, in both software and hardware, has moved on, DivX's implementations have not. I would even go as far to say that DivX's certification policy is now harming Mpeg4's long term future.... A future that you guys have not yet confirmed you'll remain part of!


Cheers

[DigitAl56K]

Here's an answer:
DivX is doing anything <i>but</i> harming the future of MPEG-4. You guys might want 3-point GMC, QPEL, custom quantization matrices, PAR etc. in your video stream - but the truth is not every player out there can support this.

Why don't we release a completely new set of players with an enhanced feature set? The problem in making DivX, or "MPEG-4" if you wish to generalise, become the next big standard is that devices <i>have</i> to be compatible with all of the content - if we release an enhanced version of the profile right now and people started creating MPEG-4 streams with all of these features enabled, we'd break half the existing DivX Certified players and people would become disinterested because of poor reliability and performance.

Continually moving the goal posts wreaks havoc for establishing any kind of standard platform, so while the "MPEG-4" standard contains several features that we would all <i>like</i> to use if we had the choice, the DivX Certified standard has to move more slowly in order to become adopted.

You will see that right now we're starting to see units pushed through retail outlets in large quantities - imagine if we broke all of those units tomorrow just so that you could use 3-point GMC and get an extra 1.5% PSNR score? Is that really worth it?

[SeeMoreDigital]

The problem is with your certification policy... it's flawed!

When you get down to it there should be two types of players. Those that can cope with Advanced Simple Profile material properly and those that can't.

Unfortunately DXN have confused this issue because you took in upon yourselves to adopt just a few ASP features (ie: 1B-VOP and 1S-VOP) which effectively says to all player manufacturers "these are the features you have to include if you want to join our club". And in doing so you've built a rod for your own back and everybody else!

But not everybody wants to join a club with limited membership!

Every old Mpeg4 player should be able to decode 'simple profile' encodes. Every MediaTek chip-set player should be able to decode 'ASP' encodes including those with multiple B-VOP's, but the fact is they can't because they've always got to include your codecs limited features (weather they are in your club or not). The worst of which is your S-VOP implementation.

Sure, some of us want more encoding toys and yes we know that some owners of old players will get left out. But this should not be used as an excuse for you not to keep up with the changes... If you are that worried about it, why not create an more flexible GUI for your codec, one that has options for 'Old DivX Certified Players' and 'New DivX Certified Players'

I'm always a little amused as to why you did not include a DivX Certified 'stand-alone' player option in your codecs GUI anyway. That way you could have done away with the confusing Qpel option and maybe even packed bit-stream!

Don't get me wrong, I like what DivX has done for Mpeg4 but in my opinion you should never included 'part' ASP implementations for stand-alone players, it should have been 'all' or 'nothing'.

It would be less confusing for us customers if the was an option in all stand-alone players that let us to switch 'DivX Certification' on or off. But I doubt you would allow this in certified players!


Cheers

[bond]

sorry, but i feel the need to bring this divx certification advertising down to the reality, which is that there are basically 4 chips existing, from which 2 support the full advanced simple profile (with the exception of 3wp gmc) and future chips will surely not be able to go down with the supported feature set again...
so from the support on the hardware side, its 2:2 "against" the divx certification

also features like qpel or custom quants, which are not included in the divx certification, are highly important for the achieved quality!
and they didnt become supported on the 2 newest chips because of divxnetworks' "certification", but because the users simply want to use the full feature set of mpeg-4 asp and they indeed use it
therefore the divx certification also serves no purpose in bringing new features to the hardware players, better supporting more powerful mpeg-4 codecs than divx5, in fact it hinders the adoption of newer chips, as old, cheaper chips are divx certified anyways...

all in all the divx certification is outdated and imho serves no other purpose anymore than bringing a divx logo on the devices

still of course i fully understand divxnetworks doing this and there is nothing wrong with this as long as other people exist telling the user that they should look out for MPEG-4 ASP@L5


edit: in fact the upcoming "nero certification" does exactly the same: the aim at compatibility with the weakest solutions existing, so the nero logo can be placed on as much players a possible. this tactic is a good soution for nero and dxn, but a poor solution for the consumer, who wants quality which excludes grap chips
its like everyone agreeing on VCD to be the best way to encode a movie, simply because its least common denominator, supported everywhere... but what about the quality?

[DigitAl56K]

So you would like us to roll out one set of DivX Certified devices that can play all DivX content (ASP), and another set that will only play some of it, and you think that will actually drive standards adoption?

What planet are you living on?

Also, we are not certifying players for MPEG-4 playback, we are certifying players for DivX playback.

If we had pushed CE manufacturers to support MPEG-4 in its most complete form from day 1, you would see precisely zero certified devices out there today, and there would be no standards. You would not be able to tell whether your CE device could reliably play your content or not, because every device would be different.

Think about what you're asking for, then try to come up with an actual solution that will work for the mass market...

[SeeMoreDigital]

The solution is easy!

Dump your useless 1WP GMC option replace it with 3WP GMC and create an codec that allows multiple B-VOP's

And when you release a new encoder. Create two options, one for MK1 DivX certified stand-alone players. And another for everything else!


Job done!

[DigitAl56K]

Yeah, you try telling all your CE partners you just broke all their devices, and several million consumers that their new DivX Certified players won't actually play new DivX movies...

Not gonna happen

You need to stop focusing on the next best feature, and start considering the benefits in compatibility.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Hey Alistair,

We are trying to help you (DXN) out here!

In my opinion DXN cocked up when as soon 'DivX certified' players were launched because you did not design your encoder with two options. A hardware player option. And a software player option!

I wonder how many 'DivX certified' stand-alone player users have generated encodes with Qpel for-instance?

If DXN wants to carry on with your method of certification then why not provide different versions of certification (ie: Mk1, Mk2 etc), to keep pace with player advances in technology.

It's obvious that player technology will move on and so should your certification. As long as your encoder is well laid out and clearly lists the hardware and software player options, everyone will be happy and no CE devices will be broken!

Sounds quite sensible to me!


Cheers

[thekid]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Hey Alistair,

We are trying to help you (DXN) out here!

and we appreciate it!

In my opinion DXN cocked up when as soon 'DivX certified' players were launched because you did not design your encoder with two options. A hardware player option. And a software player option!

Cheers

I (and others here) agree with you

but... problem is those files are never contained and always get out into the DivX ecosystem and users would never be able to tell a DivX Hardware encoded file vs. a DivX Software encoded file and thus the user expierience would suck quite hard...

The reason for our certification and the lower standards it has is when we started this off there were absolutly ZERO hardware chips that could handle the advanced features. We can dig up some old posts on this if we need to but i know you will remember these discussions.

That said, hardware will advanced and of course we will advance with it and make new and higher profiles that will incorporate new features, more features, tons of cool stuff etc...

But for right now, we are trying to deliver the best possible user experience through hardware that we can. In doing so we might be excluding some of the higher end features but they are being sacrified for the greater good of playing (most) DivX files on all your DivX devices.

stay tuned for some bigger, better, super advanced profiles in hardware and in software

thekid...

oh and DigitAL? we are setting your status back to newbie

[DigitAl56K]

Aiight, me and TheKid are off to spill some blood here, anyone want to make bets?

[thekid]

the dust has settled... and the kid won...

thekid...

[DigitAl56K]

Aiight you're in trouble now! :P

[CruNcher]

@DigitAl56K
@TheKid
@Junto
@Gej
@and all the others

I dont't see the problems user encounter @ the moment in things like 3 Warppoint GMC more in the problems MediaTek and others have to make good Firmware that works with XviD aswell with DivX correct infact i can fully understand that SOC manufactures don't like to include a tool like GMC into their Chips which has very low benifits but needs alot of processing Power @ all, but thats not the the point the real point in this discussion is the problem about interoperability and thats a bad thing Chip wise the current situation is ok with the 2nd Chip Generation now, but on the Firmware side their are still alot things that have to be done and i think for example MediaTek enginers are a bit lazy in that matter and im happy to see that Kiss/Sigma are gonna try to change that hopefully not only for DivX customers and don't let us play those fooly games here the Scene brought you where you are today you should never forget that especialy in the CE sector and please dont try to make people belive without you Mpeg-4 codecs wouldn't exist today sure CE Devices wouldn't have come so fast but would they have the problems they suffer today ?.

[DigitAl56K]

@Cruncher & all

I did not intent to suggest there would be no players out there without DivX, sorry if I came off this way, I was just trying to throw some ideas out there real quick around compatibility and interoperability with respect to some of the features you guys are asking for, which obviously didn't work too well on my part

In your eyes, how can we make players better?

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by DigitAl56K
In your eyes, how can we make players better?

By not tying the hands of player manufacturers, who adopt DivX certification, behind their backs!

Give them the freedom to create firmware that can support 'all' ASP features including multiple B-VOP's and 3WP GMC (as well as 1WP GMC).

Also, is there any reason why packed bitstream needs to be used?


Cheers

[DigitAl56K]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
By not tying the hands of player manufacturers, who adopt DivX certification, behind their backs!

Give them the freedom to create firmware that can support 'all' ASP features including multiple B-VOP's and 3WP GMC (as well as 1WP GMC).

Also, is there any reason why packed bitstream needs to be used?


Cheers

No manufacturer is limited to the feature sets of DivX Certified profiles - these are only the minimum requirements. Any manufacturer is free to go above and beyond that and support any MPEG-4 feature that they like.

We use packed bitstream to improve seeking and audio/video sync.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by DigitAl56K
No manufacturer is limited to the feature sets of DivX Certified profiles - these are only the minimum requirements. Any manufacturer is free to go above and beyond that and support any MPEG-4 feature that they like.

Will they still have your permission to put your DivX logo on their units though?

Originally posted by DigitAl56K
We use packed bitstream to improve seeking and audio/video sync.

But you do realize that in creating this AVI hack, you've created an Mpeg4 in MP4 compliance problem. And that many 'non' DivX certified players struggle with it?

Is this the reason why you keep stalling over the issue of adopting the MP4 container (having dropped it after DivX5.0.2) because you realize your own streams are no longer compliant?


Cheers

[DigitAl56K]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Will they still have your permission to put your DivX logo on their units though?

Yes they will

But you do realize that in creating this AVI hack, you've created an Mpeg4 in MP4 compliance problem. And that many 'non' DivX certified players struggle with it?

Actually, this is a misconception. Our bitstream is compliant, it is simply the way that it is stored in the AVI container that is different. Thus, non-certified devices may have problems with packed bitstream in AVI containers if the manufacturer did not consider this in their design. Certification ensures that these issues are caught before a player goes to market.