CoreCodec/H.264 Codec "CoreAVC" - Page 94

Jay Bee · 7th November 2006, 18:14

That's why I asked, don't want to cause unnecessary suffering for my F5 key.

ajp_anton · 7th November 2006, 21:10

What about x64?
Is it the codec or the player that can/should be 64-bit?

JohnnyFu · 7th November 2006, 21:11

Very good news Betaboy. I will auto-check my e-mail account every minute from now on.

Disabled · 7th November 2006, 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by BetaBoy

/me breathes... Now back OT... Here comes a New CoreAVC, New Splitter, New Website, new Server, Lower Price, a slew of fixes... and the now even faster H.264 goodness ;-)

So it is supposed to be faster is it? Why does it not get stated in the changelog?
I think I'm staying 1.1 then, no registration and same decoding speed...
Sad sad sad... I'm not in need for a personal firewall, but I'm not trusting CoreAVC anymore if it phones home...

bob0r · 7th November 2006, 21:30

- Fix: Multiple multithreading issues

Sounds like at least one possible speed up.

oddball · 7th November 2006, 22:23

Any reason GPU support has been dropped from 1.2?

BetaBoy · 7th November 2006, 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by oddball

Any reason GPU support has been dropped from 1.2?

Not dropped... just in a later 1.2.x release... although our roadmap may bump it to a 1.3 release but the time period would be the same.

BetaBoy · 7th November 2006, 23:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob0r

- Fix: Multiple multithreading issues

Sounds like at least one possible speed up.

Its one... there are other things that just did not warrant adding it to the changelog... Let the users tell us if this version is faster ;-)

BetaBoy · 8th November 2006, 01:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disabled

So it is supposed to be faster is it? Why does it not get stated in the changelog?
I think I'm staying 1.1 then, no registration and same decoding speed...
Sad sad sad... I'm not in need for a personal firewall, but I'm not trusting CoreAVC anymore if it phones home...

Its your choice entirely... we have been upfront 100% of the way in what we are doing. You are clearly wrong and way off base on your pre-judgement of both the decoder (which is faster) and what we are doing with the registration process before we even launch it.

Speak facts and not speculations... our intent is true... we want to prove the value of providing for the future growth of all of our products many of which I have yet to announce... In the end the better we can support them the better they will be... and it is the end user that benefits.

Romario · 8th November 2006, 03:28

If I decide to pay for CoreAVC 1.2, I want 64-bit version, BetaBoy. Don't you think that 64-bit version is necessary?

Shinigami-Sama · 8th November 2006, 03:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romario

If I decide to pay for CoreAVC 1.2, I want 64-bit version, BetaBoy. Don't you think that 64-bit version is necessary?

64bit for what?
*nix?
xp64?
vista?

they dont even have a *nix port yet I dont think

Sirber · 8th November 2006, 03:32

What's that "call home" BS?

BetaBoy · 8th November 2006, 03:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shinigami-Sama

64bit for what?
*nix?
xp64?
vista?

they dont even have a *nix port yet I dont think

In our SDK we have an CoreAVC reference that supports the following platforms:

CE, Windows Mobile, Smartphone, Palm, Symbian, Windows, Linux, OS X (Universal and PPC).

Shinigami-Sama · 8th November 2006, 03:36

In your SDK, ok, so porting over wouldn't be that bad.
but I was speaking of public ports
or should I try the site again to see how out of date I am?

Romario · 8th November 2006, 04:50

I think on xp64 and Vista64 versions of CoreAVC 1.2

BetaBoy, you avoided to answer directly on my question!

Hans Ohlo · 8th November 2006, 08:25

oh man now i am sad again. what stays from the prior much hyped 1.2 is... calling home and some minor speed improvements. sorry, but this is way to much to pay (the new licensing model) for what we do not get (foremost GPU).

wiak · 8th November 2006, 09:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romario

I think on xp64 and Vista64 versions of CoreAVC 1.2

BetaBoy, you avoided to answer directly on my question!

XP64 & Vista64 uses the same model
and you can easly port a win32 software to win64 software
just look at xvid there is a 64bit port of that one
http://nwgat.net/mirrors/okejl.dk/dunstan/

Disabled · 8th November 2006, 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirber

What's that "call home" BS?

That call home BS is that you have to activate 1.2 like you have to activate Norton Antivirus or Adobe Acrobat or MS Office and such. The program is then tied to your computer and you can't easily move your legally bought program to another computer and such. Its like DRM but for Software.

I feel very sorry for Core. I initially bought the pro version to support the devs and because GPU accel would be great, but I would never have done so if i knew how CoreAVC would evolve. I'm pretty sure you could be sued over here in germany for advertising features you do not deliver and for incorporating constraints I did not know before I bought it in a software that still not does what it was supposed to do as I bought the software.
This is what I bought:
Baseline Profile Support, Main Profile Support, High Profile Support, Interlaced (PAFF), Interlaced (MBAFF), SMP (multi-processor) Support, GPU (video card) Acceleration Support
Where does it say stupid activation process? Nowhere! And I don't call the activation a feature that would fall under the "features subject to change" line.

Then there is this refund policy. I would say change it to "refund is possible 30days until you received the software", as that would still not be the case and I would have time to force the refund until GPU support is added! I'm pretty sure that would be a clause that would not stand in our courts either.

BetaBoy · 8th November 2006, 12:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Romario

I think on xp64 and Vista64 versions of CoreAVC 1.2

BetaBoy, you avoided to answer directly on my question!

I did not avoid it... I think I have spoken about x64 a few times in this thread...

Answer: likely yes, but not till later.

giandrea · 8th November 2006, 12:44

Do you have plans for a QuickTime component for Mac OS X?
It would be great to have H264 high profile decoding at such speeds built into QuickTime.

8th November 2006, 03:28	#1870 \| Link
Romario Registered User Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Qetchua mountains in Peru, and Klingon battlecruiser D'Mar Posts: 393	If I decide to pay for CoreAVC 1.2, I want 64-bit version, BetaBoy. Don't you think that 64-bit version is necessary? __________________ Live long and prosperLive long and prosperLive long and prosper

8th November 2006, 03:32	#1872 \| Link
Sirber retired developer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 8,978	What's that "call home" BS? __________________ Detritus Software

8th November 2006, 04:50	#1875 \| Link
Romario Registered User Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Qetchua mountains in Peru, and Klingon battlecruiser D'Mar Posts: 393	I think on xp64 and Vista64 versions of CoreAVC 1.2 BetaBoy, you avoided to answer directly on my question! __________________ Live long and prosperLive long and prosperLive long and prosper

7th November 2006, 18:14	#1861 \| Link
Jay Bee Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 451	That's why I asked, don't want to cause unnecessary suffering for my F5 key.

7th November 2006, 21:10	#1862 \| Link
ajp_anton Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Stockholm/Helsinki Posts: 805	What about x64? Is it the codec or the player that can/should be 64-bit?

7th November 2006, 21:11	#1863 \| Link
JohnnyFu Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Germany, Hamburg Posts: 111	Very good news Betaboy. I will auto-check my e-mail account every minute from now on.

7th November 2006, 21:30	#1865 \| Link
bob0r Pain and suffering Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,337	- Fix: Multiple multithreading issues Sounds like at least one possible speed up.

7th November 2006, 22:23	#1866 \| Link
oddball Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,264	Any reason GPU support has been dropped from 1.2?

8th November 2006, 08:25	#1876 \| Link
Hans Ohlo Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 123	oh man now i am sad again. what stays from the prior much hyped 1.2 is... calling home and some minor speed improvements. sorry, but this is way to much to pay (the new licensing model) for what we do not get (foremost GPU).

8th November 2006, 12:44	#1880 \| Link
giandrea Registered User Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Italy Posts: 154	Do you have plans for a QuickTime component for Mac OS X? It would be great to have H264 high profile decoding at such speeds built into QuickTime.