CoreCodec/H.264 Codec "CoreAVC"

[Thunderbolt8]

maybe im too stupid to find it...but I still cant see the 1.2 version on that page.

[Ginsonic]

Should all emails be out, I still did not receive one (also not in spam folder) ?

[Sirber]

http://i15.tinypic.com/30i95hj.png

utf8? :)

[f@chance]

Well, new system should have waited. but I am off tomorrow and wanted to take it with me.

After the Paypal thingy, I was directed to the registration page filled it out and after clicking Registeering it just cleaned out the fileds and waiting, Nothing. Name & email address is registered because I can't do it again, but no link no registration confirm email not in the inbox or the spam folder.

Well Betabiy you and the Paypal contact got an email with the details. Please advise.

[BetaBoy]

http://i15.tinypic.com/30i95hj.png

utf8? :)
mmm... I'll look into it.. thx!

[Ginsonic]

Still no email :(

[toytown]

Same error as johnnyfu, back to the old version for now.

[BetaBoy]

All registered users users have been sent upgrade notices... if you have not received it you can wait a few hours or send me an email betaboy@corecodec.com and i'll do a lookup for you.

[BetaBoy]

Same error as johnnyfu, back to the old version for now.

Log back into your Core Account and re-download it... we fixed that issue.

[toytown]

Log back into your Core Account and re-download it... we fixed that issue.

I did and i just redownloaded it again and still the same. I also tried a reboot and removing the old coreavc folders from my system before trying.

I've gone back to the old version for now and i'll wait to see if anybody else gets the problem before i try again.

[BetaBoy]

I did and i just redownloaded it again and still the same. I also tried a reboot and removing the old coreavc folders from my system before trying.

I've gone back to the old version for now and i'll wait to see if anybody else gets the problem before i try again.

Standard or Pro Edition? Also try to download it with a different name to avoid it being a cache issue.

[Ginsonic]

if you have not received it you can wait a few hours or send me an email betaboy@corecodec.com and i'll do a lookup for you
I just sent You an email, thanks for Your help !

[BetaBoy]

Ok, i testet the new CoreAVC with DVBViewer and DVB-S2 Programms, and it still lags :( CPU Usage is only ~30-40%

Can you give me more details?

[JohnnyFu]

Hey Betaboy :)

Thx for the fix, the install works fine now.

I decided to make a comparison on 1.1.0.5 and 1.2.0.0. So i booted up my testsystem. When i try to update CoreAVC on this hard drive i get: This product has already been activated. Please contact CoreCodec.Sales@gmail.com for assistance, it´s the same computer/hardware just another (old) hard drive / optimized-clean-OS, wich i am using for tests.
Now i realize the activation thing... lol. So that means i can install CoreAVC only on one Windows installation ? What to do when i am going to format Windows (usually i do a format every 2-3 months) ?

However... looks like i have to run the 1.2.0.0 tests on my worksystem. Will post the results later in this thread.

[Hans Ohlo]

Hey Betaboy :)

Thx for the fix, the install works fine now.

I decided to make a comparison on 1.1.0.5 and 1.2.0.0. So i booted up my testsystem. When i try to update CoreAVC on this hard drive i get: This product has already been activated. Please contact CoreCodec.Sales@gmail.com for assistance, it´s the same computer/hardware just another (old) hard drive / optimized-clean-OS, wich i am using for tests.
Now i realize the activation thing... lol. So that means i can install CoreAVC only on one Windows installation ? What to do when i am going to format Windows (usually i do a format every 2-3 months) ?

However... looks like i have to run the 1.2.0.0 tests on my worksystem. Will post the results later in this thread.

same here, tried at work and now at home can not install it. this is SO FU**ED UP.

[Jay Bee]

OK, quick review from me:

-Activation system worked fine although I like programs to at least tell me they are going connect to the internet before sending out my data. Also some more information about number of unlocks, number of machines, what to do with Windows reinstalls etc. would be nice. I use other software that use online activation but none of them were as harsh as to give you only a single unlock. Better put your flameproof suit on fast.

-Minor speed improvements (about 1 to 5%).

-Lossless AVC files now work.

-Surprisingly x264 interlaced and Elecard/Mainconcept MBAFF still don't work. I hope there will be a quick fix for this.

-And a small improvement suggestion: I think the default deinterlacing method should be "DirectShow" as this is generally considered to be very powerfull on most of todays graphics cards.

Anyway keep up the good work guys (but please don't let us wait months for important fixes like the interlaced problems I mentioned or the DVB HDTV problems mentioned further up).

[Sirber]

I don't really like that activation thing. I bought it coz I like you guys.
But if I have to crack it if I format or change my HW... that's bad.

[Sharktooth]

Ah! I was about to buy it but my sixth sense told me to check doom9.org forum.
Activation is ugly!

[blubberbirne]

Can you give me more details?

The Picture "stutters", but maybe it's a bug of DVBViewer. I will also tell the Problem this guys

[f@chance]

Buying this codec really sucks. Paid with Paypal, browser hickup after creation of account, no download link. Stuck with a paid PayPal bill, can't associate the account that was created after the Paypal redirection to get a download link.

And I waited, no 1.1 installation, just plain vanilla 1.2 no previous installation, never thought I would ever get passed the registration stage. I leave tomorrow for South Africa and want to take this codec with me, please get your registration sorted.

Like it was mentioned in a thread on the CoreAVC forum the cracked version doesn't provide these type of headaches.

[JohnnyFu]

-Minor speed improvements (about 1 to 5%).

Can't confirm that. I recorded the cpu usage using perfmon on two different video files. Each test has passed three times and i then calculated an avarage value.

First i ran CoreAVC 1.1.0.5 on overlay-mixer and haali (media player classic). Since haali needs alot more cpu i decided not use it in the tests.

http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/haali_overlay.png
Apple Ice Age II Trailer
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/coreavc_1.png
A 2minute sequence from BBC HD Planet Earth Episode 2 (MBAFF)
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/coreavc_2.png

I think there are technical limits for decoding speed and CoreAVC is probably close. However, main thing is that they fixed alot of bugs. I am sure we will see a speed improvement when they implement GPU support.

Edit:Error of measurement is about +-1%

[Thunderbolt8]

so according to these graphics, the speed increase / cpu usage decrease is basically neglible ?

considering my other point, I am right with the assumption that 1.2 is currently only available as update for those who already bought it ? if yes, when will the page be updated for the rest ?

[Sharktooth]

They sell coreavc 1.2 on their website. And no, its not only an update.
However im skeptic about activation and i will think twice before buying it.

[Sirber]

I am right with the assumption that 1.2 is currently only available as update for those who already bought it ? if yes, when will the page be updated for the rest ?If you haven't bought it, then how did you get it?

www.coreavc.com

[JohnnyFu]

considering my other point, I am right with the assumption that 1.2 is currently only available as update for those who already bought it ? if yes, when will the page be updated for the rest ?

You can buy CoreAVC 1.2 on www.coreavc.com (not coreavc.corecodec.com, this sub-domain has to be redirected i think)

Edit: Sirber beats me.. :)

[wiak]

for people that dont get the mail *CHECK* you junkmail/spam folder
and at BetaBoy the new account system dont tell you if you have successful registered, when you click register
:thanks:

[orbitlee]

SMP(multi-core CPU) support limit is reduced from 4 to 2, right?

[eyesonme]

my god，smp 4 to 2 orz

[Hans Ohlo]

SMP(multi-core CPU) support limit is reduced from 4 to 2, right?

WHAT!?! I payed for SMP support up to 4 processors/cores!

* Features in each CoreAVC Edition is subject to change.
that has to be a joke. man, guys i supported you from day one and this is what i get? i can not reinstall my pc without hastle and features get removed... WOW

[Sharktooth]

Have you got 4 CPU/Cores or are you planning to have them?

[Malow]

no trial version? :mad:

[Sharktooth]

Seems the trial version donwload button is not yet linked... so, guess what?

[Hans Ohlo]

Have you got 4 CPU/Cores or are you planning to have them?
as a matter of fact... yes. my issue is not that i totally need 4 cores to handle avc streams. it is the fact how corecodec handles their customers. (yes i allready wrote a mail directly to them).

[f@chance]

Quote of the day

i think this release is clearly dedicated to the new registration-system...

[wiak]

as a matter of fact... yes. my issue is not that i totally need 4 cores to handle avc streams. it is the fact how corecodec handles their customers. (yes i allready wrote a mail directly to them).

as long the readme.txt has been up it has allways sad that it has 2 cores/ 2 singel-cpu smp no more or less on the pro version


CoreAVC™ Professional Edition Decoder
- H.264 Baseline, Main, High profile support
- Interlaced support (PAFF and MBAFF)
- SMP (multi-core CPU) support (limit 2)
- GPU support*

[Thunderbolt8]

You can buy CoreAVC 1.2 on www.coreavc.com (not coreavc.corecodec.com, this sub-domain has to be redirected i think)

Edit: Sirber beats me.. :)

no, i cant. theres only coreavc 1.1 there.

[cacepi]

I'm too tired to laugh ;-).... Last thing we are now doing for Jarod is checking for site spelling errors (I am still sure he'll find a few i'll miss).He missed a few.

From the Company section:

"Founded in 2002, CoreCodec, Inc. is [?] privately held corporation whos focus is on Audio and Video Multimedia Technology."

SDK Licensing:

"CoreCodec offers pricing for licensing the source code for CoreAVC within it's SDK (Software Development Kit) for third party H.264 playback integration."

"after the evaluator/licensee completes a non disclosure, software evaluation agreements and answers a licensing questionaire."

And why does the bottom of the page say "This Category is currently empty "?

Just trying to help!

[Disabled]

as long the readme.txt has been up it has allways sad that it has 2 cores/ 2 singel-cpu smp no more or less on the pro version

Well I have a readme stating:
Version 1.1.0.5
[...]
CoreAVC. Professional Edition Decoder
- Baseline, Main, High profile support
- Interlaced support (PAFF and MBAFF)
- SMP (multi-core CPU) support (limit 4)
- GPU support*
*edit*
This statement was included in the decoder archive since V1.0.0.0

[Hans Ohlo]

*edit*
This statement was included in the decoder archive since V1.0.0.0
exactly. i am so pissed right now because i installed the decoder at my working place because i was eager to test it. no warning, now message where i had to agree with the online activation. so now at home i am not able to install the decoder at my media center pc.

[Disabled]

exactly. i am so pissed right now because i installed the decoder at my working place because i was eager to test it. no warning, now message where i had to agree with the online activation. so now at home i am not able to install the decoder at my media center pc.

I read somewhere that you can just download the file again and activate the new download. That would still stop illegal distribution and thus might be possible but would give you the option to reinstall it as often as you want.
I can confirm that the .ax has some bytes changed everytime you redownload the installer... I did not install the new version yet, as I'm still not trusting the new activation. And with no speed improvements (as reported by JFu) and no others advantages for me I'll keep running 1.1.0.5.

[oddball]

Help! I just purchased 1.2 pro version and when it forwards me to portal.coreforge.org I get this error.

"A serious error has occurred.Duplicate entry '1825' for key 1"

[Inventive Software]

Congratulations CoreCodec on the launch. You've managed to piss some people off (those who haven't read the whole thread no doubt), but others (JohnnyFu for example) have had no problems, so it's a little hit and miss. I'll wait a few months before purchasing for you lot to iron out the bugs in your systems. ;)

[oddball]

OK the page loaded and asked for me to register. I entered my details and now it wants a 16 digit registration number. I have not even got the software yet!

Nothing in my email inbox either!

[Jay Bee]

Can't confirm that. I recorded the cpu usage using perfmon on two different video files. Each test has passed three times and i then calculated an avarage value.


I can see one or two peaks in your graphs where the new version stays a few percent under the old one. :) But yeah, I guess I was just trying to look for something positive in this release. As it stands the release highlight really is the online activation. And after seeing a lot of the negativity here and at the CoreAVC forums I think Core have to seriously rethink their plans. I mean if they can't convince the doom9 people that their decoder is worth the hassle then how are they ever going to be successful anywhere else?

[AmbKosh]

Great. I'm also receiving the "A serious error has occurred.Duplicate entry '1828' for key 1" Message after I payed via PayPal.
OK. Now after I reloaded the page I'm at the same point as oddball. What is my 16-digit number? Where can I get it?

BetaBoy: What can I do now?

[JohnnyFu]

I can see one or two peaks in your graphs where the new version stays a few percent under the old one. :)

This is due to imprecise measurement of perfmon unfortunately i don't know a more precise way to do such records.

[BetaBoy]

Great. I'm also receiving the "A serious error has occurred.Duplicate entry '1828' for key 1" Message after I payed via PayPal.
OK. Now after I reloaded the page I'm at the same point as oddball. What is my 16-digit number? Where can I get it?

BetaBoy: What can I do now?
Copy and paste it to me and tell me how you got the error... betaboy@corecodec.com

[Disabled]

@BetaBoy
I'll stop ranting about activation for a moment and just ask you to tell us how activation works, what it is sending, how can we activate it with offline computers, what we are allowed to do and what we are not and everything else we should know.
I don't wanna find out the hard way I can only activate it once or such.
*edit*
Why do I have a calculator and a clock in the CoreAccount "My Webpage"?

[BetaBoy]

Jay Bee... or testing shows at the very least a 1% increase but as high as 5% on some files (stick with the low-end on average)

[AmbKosh]

Copy and paste it to me and tell me how you got the error... betaboy@corecodec.com

I just sent you an email with the description and the activation link which failed for me.

Thanks for you help.

[Hans Ohlo]

I read somewhere that you can just download the file again and activate the new download. That would still stop illegal distribution and thus might be possible but would give you the option to reinstall it as often as you want.
nope not working.

i understand the illegal use thing, but why should i buy 2 copies if i just want to use it on two machines but only on one at a time...

[oddball]

I've also just emailed you the activation link that failed. This is very frustrating.

[JohnnyFu]

or testing shows at the very least a 1% increase but as high as 5% on some files (stick with the low-end on average)

Yes there is a little (about 0.5% to 1%) improvement on the Planet Earth movie i have tested.
I will test more video files tomorrow.

For those who are interessted i attached the excel sheet from the screens i posted before in this thread.

Edit: can someone translate or write "(stick with the low-end on average)" with other words for me ?

[Disabled]

nope not working.

Ok, so this thing has a more strict activation than every other software I know of... Great!

i understand the illegal use thing, but why should i buy 2 copies if i just want to use it on two machines but only on one at a time...
I agree with you somehow. But the MPEG LA is forcing you to buy two licences for two installed decoders too. So I can somehow understand if core would not allow this use. Usually you can install it anyway, as you can activate normal software more than once, but that does not imply that its legal to use it on two machines.

IMHO it shoud be legal, to have the installer on both machines and deinstall it every time you shut down your computer and install it on every start... (assuming you have just one computer running at a time)

[oddball]

P.S. raising a ticket on the portal site does not seem to work properly in Seamonkey but that's probably because I use Multizilla for tabbing in it and Adblock. The product type selection pops up in a new tab and the javascript fails when I click on any product. It does nothing and I am unable to select the product type in the previous tab. Better to have a drop down box for that anyhow.

[Malow]

-Surprisingly x264 interlaced and Elecard/Mainconcept MBAFF still don't work. I hope there will be a quick fix for this.

ow, great.. so much waiting for nothing... trial download not ready yet... so i can't even test it also... "little" disappointing... :(

[Jay Bee]

Jay Bee... or testing shows at the very least a 1% increase but as high as 5% on some files (stick with the low-end on average)

Hehe, exactly the numbers I mentioned further up after looking at a few perfmon graphs.

Another thing: I wanted to log-in again to the page linked in the email to have a look around the new site. When I click on "Sign In" a download window of the CoreAVC exe pops up and I can't get into the site. There's a trick for me to get in though: enter a wrong password! :scared:

[oddball]

Ridiculous. You would have thought they would beta test their registration system and website before going live.

[Dregelmyller]

I purchased it today but have not received any code or installer,
the whole process seems kind of complicated.

I registered a core account and it askes for a ID number.

What am i supposed to do ? :)

[AmbKosh]

What am i supposed to do ? :)

Dregelmyller: put you name on the waiting list and take you place in the queue behine oddball and me... ;)

[oddball]

Do a little dance. Make a little love. Get down tonight!

[Dregelmyller]

Dregelmyller: put you name on the waiting list and take you place in the queue behine oddball and me... ;)

Hehe, owell it feels good i am not the only one :P

[BetaBoy]

@BetaBoy
I'll stop ranting about activation for a moment and just ask you to tell us how activation works, what it is sending, how can we activate it with offline computers, what we are allowed to do and what we are not and everything else we should know.
I don't wanna find out the hard way I can only activate it once or such.

We are adding offline registration within your Core Account... you simply populate the info and it compiles an installer for you... We are working on that now.

[smok3]

so my coreavc workflow for today was;

delete the old install > get the new version > install the new version > visit recycle bin :)

[Disabled]

Just found something about the activation in the corecodec forums from BetaBoy
- Activation occurs during the install process
- The registration is linked to your Core Account
- The registration is linked to your Windows OS

Downloads and updates will be available as 'self-serve' from your Core Account. For those that mentioned 'offline registration' or for those behind a strict firewall... Your Core Account will have an offline availability mode to download an installer compiled JUST for your OS.
http://www.corecodec.com/forum/index.php?topic=3491.msg20913#msg20913

*edit*
We are adding offline registration within your Core Account... you simply populate the info and it compiles an installer for you... We are working on that now.
Well thanks for the info, but could you please tell me what infos youre thinking about?
And can you please tell me if I am allowed to reinstall my Windows and still be able to activate CoreAVC? And all the other questions that still arrise here?

[Dregelmyller]

I am also interested in knowing what happens after reformat,
if i buy Vista or buy new hardware.

[oddball]

Erm. So when can I expect to recieve the goods I paid for? I have sent the relevant details. All I need is a download link and reg number. Is it really that hard to do?

[BetaBoy]

ow, great.. so much waiting for nothing... trial download not ready yet... so i can't even test it also... "little" disappointing... :(

Malow... Trial is on the todo for a few hours.

[BetaBoy]

Just found something about the activation in the corecodec forums from BetaBoy

http://www.corecodec.com/forum/index.php?topic=3491.msg20913#msg20913

*edit*

Well thanks for the info, but could you please tell me what infos youre thinking about?
And can you please tell me if I am allowed to reinstall my Windows and still be able to activate CoreAVC? And all the other questions that still arrise here?

Reinstallation will work with the same installer your downloaded no problem.

[BetaBoy]

Erm. So when can I expect to recieve the goods I paid for? I have sent the relevant details. All I need is a download link and reg number. Is it really that hard to do?

oddball... PM me the email address you purchased it with and i'll take care of it for you.

[Sirber]

Changes from 1.1 to 1.2:
* $20 now $15
* SMP on 4 CPU now 2 CPU
* no limit/activation now max 1 machine

feels like I've been screwed (bought 1.1).

[BetaBoy]

The reason SMP changed is a limit of the current code.... once completed we will change it to a higher limit again... its just a matter of being upfront of the current limitation.

[DigitalDeviant]

Ok, here is what I've been getting since 9am EST:

Unable to obtain serial number
from remote server. Please contact CoreCodec.Sales@gmail.com

I emailed the address right away and opened a ticket from my account. Danny emailed me back right away telling me to disable my firewall and run a tracerout. I did both and emailed him that neither seemed to be the cause.

Now there is another item appearing in my account with a new download link. The new link just takes me to a page that says "Error" and nothing else. I emailed a second reply a couple hours ago and still haven't heard anything.

[Romario]

That's strange. It's a very clear proof that CoreCodec is a foolish company. Their support to the customers is very bad.

I tried to download trial version, but nothing happens.

[DeepBeepMeep]

The reason SMP changed is a limit of the current code.... once completed we will change it to a higher limit again... its just a matter of being upfront of the current limitation.

So why not don't you add a "* future support for 4 cores" instead of giving us the feeling that the license for product has changed. It would not shock anyone since the "*" is already used to announce GPU support...

Well, I must say I am quite disapointed with this release. I think you should not be surprised when you have created such high expections.

It doesn't look you have been working on the decoder all this time. It seems more you have spent creating your very popular activation system and working on some other projects.

The activation system would not be such a big deal if it didn't look like spyware: no information about its existence is mentioned. No warning is given when it calls home. In fact, I still don't have any clue which personal information of mine has been sent to your server. And ovbiously given the repeated questions of other people here you are not going to answer that question.

In fact wht I regret the most is the "yes" attitude giving us wrongly the feeling that you have been listening to bug reports:
- Where is the support for interlaced Elecard and x264?
- Where did you fix the black level problem ? the black is still grey in overlay and VMR9 and requires to use ffdshow to be reduced to a correct level. Which means that if we want to have a decent PQ we must sacrify extra CPU so globally the decoder turns out to be slower.

Oh well, maybe these will be fixed 6 months from now...

[f@chance]

@BetaBoy

Thanks for addressing my problem NOT. It is almost 12 hours now that I have waited to log into my account because what Dan calls a browser bug. You are kidding right, you tested this bloody registration gizmo long enough to now find out you have a browser bug. 7 hours to get your emails out or we are done and PayPal will have a dispute to process.

[Sirber]

Source: Naruto E26 (x264, 640x480p)
CPU: AMD64 3000+

VLC: 10 - 15% CPU
MPC + CoreAVC: 8 - 15% CPU
MPC + Nero Decoder: 16 - 25% CPU
MPC + ffdshow: 15 - 20% CPU

[BetaBoy]

Ok, here is what I've been getting since 9am EST:

Unable to obtain serial number
from remote server. Please contact CoreCodec.Sales@gmail.com

I emailed the address right away and opened a ticket from my account. Danny emailed me back right away telling me to disable my firewall and run a tracerout. I did both and emailed him that neither seemed to be the cause.

Now there is another item appearing in my account with a new download link. The new link just takes me to a page that says "Error" and nothing else. I emailed a second reply a couple hours ago and still haven't heard anything.

We are answering emails as fast as we can... thx for your patience.

[BetaBoy]

For those that have had an issue registering when running the CoreAVC installer... we have identified a DNS issue that we have fixed. Now we need it to propagate.

[acidsex]

if we purchased previous versions, do we have to pay for the upgrade to 1.2?

[Sirber]

if we purchased previous versions, do we have to pay for the upgrade to 1.2?no. it's free!!! but need to be activated.

[IgorC]

Source: Naruto E26 (x264, 640x480p)
CPU: AMD64 3000+

VLC: 10 - 15% CPU
MPC + CoreAVC: 8 - 15% CPU
MPC + Nero Decoder: 16 - 25% CPU
MPC + ffdshow: 15 - 20% CPU
But for different resolutions and bitrates there are different performances.
While VLC decodes only low resolution and bitrates it is fast. When bitrates and/or resolution increase CPU usage grow without proportions comparing to other decoders. Maybe cabac and deblock aren't enough optimizied.

[oddball]

Still waiting for the software and regkey. How many people have emailed you? I can't believe it takes this long. Unless you are swamped by unhappy customers.

[Shinigami-Sama]

Still waiting for the software and regkey. How many people have emailed you? I can't believe it takes this long. Unless you are swamped by unhappy customers.

core is very small man
its not like a huge mega company or anything
last I seen there was less than 40 people, most of them deal with coding
so go take a chill pill
we're all adults here..

[Ginsonic]

Also waiting for my update notification. But I understand, that Core team has much work now and I will have further patience !

[BetaBoy]

Also waiting for my update notification. But I understand, that Core team has much work now and I will have further patience !

Thx...... we are knocking out most of the small issues. It seems the biggest one is the DNS issue. This we have no control over and we just need the changes to propagate over the next 48 hours.

[Ginsonic]

It seems the biggest one is the DNS issue
I just noticed, when opening coreavc.com !

[f@chance]

@Betaboy

You had 9 hours to knock out an email and it is now 20 hours since I could not EVEN log into my account much less download the product.

Considere we are done. Dispute raised with PayPal. If this is the shape of things to come I will get the processor to handle h.264 and forget CoreAVC.

[BetaBoy]

Can someone send me a sample of the Deinterlacing of interlaced x264 and Elecard MBAFF files that doesn't work... keep it under 4MB email it to betaboy@corecodec.com

Thx!

[BetaBoy]

@Betaboy

You had 9 hours to knock out an email and it is now 20 hours since I could not EVEN log into my account much less download the product.

Considere we are done. Dispute raised with PayPal. If this is the shape of things to come I will get the processor to handle h.264 and forget CoreAVC.

f@chance... I am addressing your issue as we speak. It looks like you should be able to login to your account from here. PM me and i'll give you more details.

[Ginsonic]

BetaBoy, BTW when adressing issues: Yesterday I sent You a second email containing a PDF with all PayPal transaction details from June, in case this can help to find my payment in Your system.

[BetaBoy]

BetaBoy, BTW when adressing issues: Yesterday I sent You a second email containing a PDF with all PayPal transaction details from June, in case this can help to find my payment in Your system.
Thx... got it...

[foxyshadis]

Man, Core has these issues every time they release a product, thanks to thousands of people rushing onto the site, and hundreds sending queries and support requests. This is what you get for getting the product the hour of release, especially since it's a whole new site. Most companies have these kinds of problems when they roll out a new anticipated product, or a new website, let alone both. I don't see how you can condemn the company so unilaterally because it's taking a few hours to answer problems, oddball, and it won't help you get support much faster. A few days, that's when it starts getting rediculous.

The DNS isn't working right for me, but then, my ISP is terribly slow at updating.

BetaBoy, you might want to put CoreCodec.com in your sig, since .org is a totally different site and it's not obvious how to get to the pay site from there.

I'd also like to hear the plans for moving activations, once you have breathing time.

[BetaBoy]

We are adding alot of 'self-serve' components... as we go. I'll also change my sig next week once we bring up the new CoreCodec.com and take down CoreCorec.org and migrate all the projects to CoreForge.org

[HookedOnTV]

New version fixed the MCE2005 freeze after stop issue.

[BetaBoy]

We see what alot of ppl are doing now... do NOT use the old services ID and password. As the upgrade email indicates this is a new system...

1 - Create a new ID /Password
2 - Log into your Core Account
3 - Click the email that was originally sent to you

Once logged in you will see a link to 'MY PURCHASES'. Click that link and then your order #. You will then see a download link on the right side.

[JohnnyFu]

Hey guys,

I have tested another two videos and finally measured a speed improvment.

the_greatest_game_ever_played from nerodigital.com, results equal
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/coreavc_4.png
And here.... (2 minute sequence from BBC HD Torchwood episode 1) a slight but free of doubt measurable speed improvment.
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/coreavc_3.png

excel sheet attached

[BetaBoy]

Thats one of the files I tested against and got similar percentage results...

[JohnnyFu]

You talking about bbc torchwood right ? Have you recorded the whole episode, or just a sequence too ?

OT: your new avatar... you are the knight rider, right ?

Watch out for Betaboy !
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/betaboy_2.jpg

[pankov]

We see what alot of ppl are doing now... do NOT use the old services ID and password. As the upgrade email indicates this is a new system...

1 - Create a new ID /Password
2 - Log into your Core Account
3 - Click the email that was originally sent to you

Once logged in you will see a link to 'MY PURCHASES'. Click that link and then your order #. You will then see a download link on the right side.
I did that and I did see the link but while searching for the original mail I accidentally closed the browser window. After I opened the site again I can't find the place to enter my order #. I see "My Home Page > Home" and Sales and Support and preferences and other but no "My Purchases"
:(
What am I missing here?

[BetaBoy]

You talking about bbc torchwood right ? Have you recorded the whole episode, or just a sequence too ?

OT: your new avatar... you are the knight rider, right ?

Watch out for Betaboy !
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/betaboy_2.jpg

The avatar is a play more or less here in the US... ppl love to 'hate' on the HOFF. I personally love the South Park episode that image was taken from... what a classic.

[Mc Onyx]

I apologize if this has been asked before, but which version will support GPU acceleration?

[oddball]

I still cannot download the software! I clicked on the download link in the portal and all it does is return a webpage with 'Error' at the top. Nothing else!

[BetaBoy]

I did that and I did see the link but while searching for the original mail I accidentally closed the browser window. After I opened the site again I can't find the place to enter my order #. I see "My Home Page > Home" and Sales and Support and preferences and other but no "My Purchases"
:(
What am I missing here?

We are working on the manual method atm...

[Inventive Software]

Ouch! Seems you people are having teething problems. How long ideally should I wait before purchasing IYO Betaboy? I'm generally quite patient...... :D

[oddball]

That method does not work. All that happens is a webpage with 'Error.' is displayed.

[oddball]

Ouch! Seems you people are having teething problems. How long ideally should I wait before purchasing IYO Betaboy? I'm generally quite patient...... :D

Next year.

[BetaBoy]

That method does not work. All that happens is a webpage with 'Error.' is displayed.

OB... PM...

[dk75]

After the "go to frame" positioned frame doesn't decoded, so you need to play and pause picture again :)
GraphEdit, AviSynth and "ImageWriter" function.

[Hans Ohlo]

sorry i have to complain again. but your activation method is he most bad i have ever run into. i installed the update on my work pc to test it. since then i am not able to install it here. why am i not able to reset the pc i want to install it on. i worte a mail and got two answers but till now no reset of the pc.

what happens if i install it and two days later want to give vista a run. do i have to wait a week to get it installed on vista? i mean windows itself can be activated liek 10 times at least before i have to phone to microsoft. but even then it is a matter of minutes to get it running and activated.
what is the matter with your activation scheme?
why can't we decide where to install or move our license?
why should we contact you if we reinstall our systems?
on what system parameters does the activation depend?
why do not give us the rights to change things on our systems?
why should i have to crawl to the cross and confess what i have changed on my system so that corecodec is forgiving and lets me activate my software again?

i see myself trying to explain myself to people that should have no concern what i changed on my system. why should i depend on their judgement to use the software i PAID for? why should i have to wait DAYS after a system change to be able to use the software again i PAID for?

why was i not made aware of the actions taken during install and that i may not be able to switch the software over to another system?

answers please...

[oddball]

I think all the above proves that activation and DRM do only one thing. Penalise the legitimate user.

[Sirber]

I think all the above proves that activation and DRM do only one thing. Penalise the legitimate user.Always been like that. Even the legitimate user wants to get the pirated copy after coz it has less crap.

[fenomeno83]

I can't pay coreavc with my postepay card(registered to paypal)!!!:(

[Zagor]

What a sad, sad, turn of events. I was really looking forward to this release. I had my credit card ready to purchase this version. After reading this thread, the credit card is back in my wallet. Another lost sale due to unreasonable DRM.

[Hans Ohlo]

if i spend the money to scare of at least one potential buyer i think i spend it good. again, i bought it to support corecodec. they did some minor fixes to the decoder and included this abysmal activation scheme which renders the software useless to powerusers (or professionals like in coreAVC professional) which work with their system and from time to time play around with new hardware and software...

[Malow]

owwwkey, the trial link was asking to login, but what login? the forum login? where to register?

ops, the trial link is gone... I'm little lost... again...

[oddball]

Still unable to download it. Looks like I will be following others in raising a Paypal dispute. Sigh....

[Inventive Software]

All the more reason for me to wait till Xmas then. It would be a nice pressie to have decent AVC playback on my Celeron 800.

[fenomeno83]

I want buy coreavc but when I want pay with paypal a message shows that but my card(postepay)isn't accepted!!But with postepay(registarered to paypal)I buy on Ebay!!!Why I can't pay coreavc??

[Px]

Hey guys,

I have tested another two videos and finally measured a speed improvment.
I think that it's more meashurment error, nor speed improvement ;)

[Px]

GraphEdit, AviSynth and "ImageWriter" function.
It's looks like have sex in hammock with gas-mask and scis ;) :D :D :D

[Shinglor]

What a sad, sad, turn of events. I was really looking forward to this release. I had my credit card ready to purchase this version. After reading this thread, the credit card is back in my wallet. Another lost sale due to unreasonable DRM.

That's great for you, but existing customers (like myself) are forced to take the DRM crippled version in order to download bugfixes and promised features (GPU accel.). I don't need a full account management website, exaggered registration processes or even an installer. I don't know the details of the activation process but if CoreAVC servers go down are we still able to install and use CoreAVC?

Here's how it should work: I give CoreAVC my money and they give me a simple DirectShow filter in a zip file (by email or http). It's a decoder, it's not an operating system.

[oddball]

Paypal dispute logged. Sorry but this is beyond ridiculous. I refuse to see why we should suffer your incompetence at being unable to supply the goods we have paid for.

[Zag]

That's great for you, but existing customers (like myself) are forced to take the DRM crippled version in order to download bugfixes and promised features (GPU accel.). I don't need a full account management website, exaggered registration processes or even an installer. I don't know the details of the activation process but if CoreAVC servers go down are we still able to install and use CoreAVC?

Here's how it should work: I give CoreAVC my money and they give me a simple DirectShow filter in a zip file (by email or http). It's a decoder, it's not an operating system.

No, it's not great for me. I really wanted coreavc and now I won't have it and will have to go a different route. The ironic thing is that it is priced just right and I would have seriously doubted piracy would have been much of an issue. Instead now I believe piracy will become an issue due to this draconian DRM and because hackers will be motivated to see who can hack it first. It's a challenge hard to ignore. It just saddens me.

[BetaBoy]

All... as I have stated we are sorry for any delay... we have been manually sending out registrations and its taking a little longer then anticipated even with 3 people working on them.

For those like oddball that cannot wait pls request a refund from PayPal while we iron out the delivery/registration problem. So for now to help us focus... we have suspended the purchasing of CoreAVC while we work on the current registered users.

[Hans Ohlo]

For those like oddball that cannot wait pls request a refund from PayPal while we iron out the delivery/registration problem. So for now to help us focus... we have suspended the purchasing of CoreAVC while we work on the current registered users.
i think thats all we every going to get from corecodec: no comments on the messed up activation.

i honestly need to say that the minute a hacked version appears on the net i will use it. man, i payed for this an am not able to use it correctly.

[JohnnyFu]

I think that it's more meashurment error, nor speed improvement ;)

Nope, it´s definitely not a measurement error. I played alot with perfmon the last weeks. I have done at least 50 test records. The highest measurement differences i found were at maximum 1,5%, so everything in the range of +-0.75% is probable a measurement error. But in this case the biggest difference i found was 2.3%. I mean the results are not 100% accurate, but the improvement is measurable.

[Shinigami-Sama]

All... as I have stated we are sorry for any delay... we have been manually sending out registrations and its taking a little longer then anticipated even with 3 people working on them.

For those like oddball that cannot wait pls request a refund from PayPal while we iron out the delivery/registration problem. So for now to help us focus... we have suspended the purchasing of CoreAVC while we work on the current registered users.

see what happens when you let random people push your schedual?
:P

hope it all works out for ya mate

[BetaBoy]

see what happens when you let random people push your schedual?
:P

hope it all works out for ya mate

Thx... we are getting caught up... by tomorrow morning we will be in alot better shape and then can concentrate on the upgrade requests and the ppl that had upgraded along the way but did not get an email.

[emmel]

Thanks for the update.

There is, however, a problem: Fsecure is not happy at all with the installer (PECompact). Any ideas?

[Inventive Software]

Whatever happened to people using NSIS eh? :D

[CruNcher]

emmel false report ignore it, but that doesn't mean you should allways ignore such warnings :P

[crypto]

This is a farce. On a forum which stands for free media, their own members introduce drm. Can this thread please be closed.

[emmel]

emmel false report ignore it, but that doesn't mean you should allways ignore such warnings :P

Well yes, usually I do ignore such warnings, at least after a cross check with another scanner and negative reports from other users.

This time it is not just the installer Fsecure wants to kill, it also wants to kill the ax whenever it loads and connects to the graph.

Hard to ignore the warning, untill I get renewed signatures and an updated database from Fsecure it self. Or then, I should disactivate the protection while using CoreAVC. And I'm not ready to go that far, given that we are talking about an application that protrecs it self by unknown means.

So, no 1.2.0 for me until Fsecure says ok. Probably not even after that.

bye

[Carpo]

PECompact - is safe to ignore in this instance as this normaly means the installer was compressed using UPX - its a form of compression.

Although only ignore such warnings if its from a trusted source as there are some little nasties about that use upx.

[bob0r]

This is a farce. On a forum which stands for free media, their on members introduce drm. Can this thread please be closed.

We can try to UnDRM CoreAVC also.... so we can keep eachother busy (ofcourse you still need to to buy it to use it)


Note for CoreAVC people:
- 4 or 5 activates PER downloaded file.
- Interlacing to be fixed, but quickly (especially BBC-HD MBAFF), quicker bugfixes in general.
- Better planning in general.
- No more advertising features that will never be aded, or will be added in 2019.
- Multi Core support, going back from 4 to just 2 cores (2 threads?) is really bad, when you have a 4 or more core system.

If those "issues" can be resolved within a reasonable timeline, lets's say 1 day - 1 month, then maybe my respect for the proper coding will return, but as it stands now, i rather buy a $3000 CPU just to decode with ffmpeg.

[dumbas..]

...thanks to thousands of people rushing onto the site, and hundreds sending queries and support requests. This is what you get for getting the product the hour of release, especially since it's a whole new site. Most companies have these kinds of problems when they roll out a new anticipated product, or a new website, let alone both. I don't see how you can condemn the company so unilaterally because it's taking a few hours to answer problems, oddball, and it won't help you get support much faster. A few days, that's when it starts getting ridiculous....

foxyshadis, I quoted this piece of sanity of yours on another board I hope you don't mind....
-----------------------------------------------------------
Personally, I got my upgrade without issue, delay or problems.
I respect Core for what they produce. And dont get out of my pram when I can't have it NOW!! as some would say here!

[Inventive Software]

Agreed. This is exactly why I'm waiting, and I praise Core for trying to sort the issues, but people whingeing when something doesn't work and lodging complaints instead of asking for help won't get them any further.

And for the non-DRM fanboys: I've said it before, I'll say it again, DRM is here to stay, we just have to live with it and work around the issues. You don't like CoreAVC? Use ffdshow. No plug intended Betaboy. :p

[dk75]

It's looks like have sex in hammock with gas-mask and scis ;) :D :D :D
Maybe, but with this you could save exactly these same frame every time you run it with whatever decoders you use it.

[Disabled]

And for the non-DRM fanboys: I've said it before, I'll say it again, DRM is here to stay, we just have to live with it and work around the issues. You don't like CoreAVC? Use ffdshow. No plug intended Betaboy. :p
Well Nuclear Weapons are here to stay, we just have to live with it. [Unfortunately I didn't come up with something more stupid]
I see two different movements in the software world: One is going drm and securing everything, the other is going open source...

@BetaBoy
I still would like to know what we are allowed to do with our "right to use the software". How do reinstallations work? What data gets send to you? I don't want my Windows key get transfered to you and such... And please! integrate a warning message, that the software needs activation!

[Romario]

This is a farce. On a forum which stands for free media, their own members introduce drm. Can this thread please be closed.

I agree with you, totally. If BetaBoy don't clarify some things about activation, this thread SHOULD be closed.

I also don't want to give him any detail, such as home address, phone number...

[Sharktooth]

I tend to agree with anti-DRM ppl too but i also understand Betaboy and his company try to protect their business and try earn some well deserved money.
If i was in their shoes i would release a free version (with the possibility for the user to donate money if he likes it) with all the pro features for PERSONAL USE ONLY, without support and without activation and other User-pissing(tm) stuff and then the COMMERCIAL versions at a higher price.
Im a supporter of the "closed source but free" programs for the home user (like the opera browser or free antiviruses/antispyware, free divx codec, etc...).
The home user has already too much money and time to spend for the hardware and the indispensable softwares (thanks to the dumb companies that sell those software at impossible prices and dont understand the end user usually pirate it for money reasons or just for all the annoying license restrictions and agreements written in cryptographic language) he cant stand an increasingly outcome for every small but usefull softwares. Yes, there are free alternatives that sometimes are even better than commercial softwares, but sometimes he has no choice... and he has no unlimited funds...

[Ginsonic]

BetaBoy: My patience is almost exhausted ;)
Still waiting for my update email !

[f@chance]

To anyone that is considering this product here is my story.

After Paypal confirmation I was redirected to the registration page. After registering nothing happened except the entry fields were cleared. No confirmation of successful registration no email no NOTHING.

When trying to login into my account it says invalid user or wrong password. When trying to register it says this email address is in use.

This was on the day when v. 1.2 was released. I fired off a few emails explain the situation. The reply was that they had a browser failure and try to login again.

HELLO I can't because I have no valid account. SO again email to explain my situation. I received detailed information on how to log in and click on the download link. The density of CoreAVC support is unsurpassed.

Further explanation and repeat explanation from past email correspondence. This time instructions of a differentkind of login AND click on the link that we send you informing you of the update.

HELLO I am a first time user with version 1.2 Since the day of the release of v 1.2 I have gotten no further with CoreAVC support then a login page that tells me of invalid user registration details.

To all those that post here the BS about CoreAVC being a small company and so forth, they are a business and as a business if they make the decision to implement a disatrous activation scheme for a $15 codec, then they deserve everything that comes with that business decision. They are not in the handout business and if you pay for a product you expect service or the product itself not a long line of excuses and explanations.

Never in my live had I have to deal with such incompetent support that can't get a disastrous roll out fixed.

Off Soapbox and still waiting to download what I paid for almost a week ago.

EDIT:
Just caught up with the posts here and just realized that the problems have just begun with running this piece of software on different partitions or machines. NOT FOR ME Paypal dispute must be escalated to PayPal claim to get your money back. And I will also buy the CPU horsepower to handle the decoding.

[Jay Bee]

About the software activation issue:

I think that without even getting into whether the system is appropriate or unfair or understandable or overkill or whatever I think that Core have been quite short-sighted or naive if they thought they could really introduce DRM without a major backlash from the users.

I mean even if they had the best and fairest activation system ever (which they don't) DRM would still be an issue that pisses lot's of people off, they should have foreseen it, it's no secret, just visit slashdot or google "DRM" to find out what people think about it. What I'm trying to say is that even if in reality DRM wasn't really as bad as its reputation then that wouldn't change the fact that the public opinion of DRM is still what it is and this cannot be a good thing for the business of a small company that caters to an extremely techy crowd.

There are also very practical problems. I for one like to make encodes that are easy for other people to view. Now I can't make an encode that needs CoreAVC for playback and give it to someone and say: now you just need to buy CoreAVC, make sure you have your internet running and your firewall open when you install it and, oh, you will only be able to ever watch it on the same machine that you first installed it to. The reaction would of course be "Err, no thx, can't you make an Xvid or DVD version?".

Now, just to be clear, I don't think Core are in anyway evil or unintelligent and I sure hope they will be able to run a successful business in the future but I think they absolutely have to realize that having more negative than positive reactions in a "fan forum" right after the release of a new version is an event that should be taken seriously. Very seriously. It's not the first time I've seen it and the product I'm thinking of pretty much died shortly after.

[Kurtnoise]

Just my 2€ cents...

Thank you and good luck to CC.com team. You've made great tools. CoreAVC is very powerfull. I use it almost every day for my avc backups. Keep up the good work despite registration issues.

and btw, you know what ? 1€ ~= 1,24919 US$ here. So, move to Europe guys...Life is cheaper. :D

[Dregelmyller]

A question for betaboy.

Has there been any e-mails with the codec sent ppl yet ? becouse my ISPs mailserver has been malfunctioning for 1 & 1/2 day. All e-mails sent to me are gone.

Just want to know so i didnt miss anything..

Seems its easier contacting you here than over mail..

[Romario]

It's very obvious that BetaBoy won't clarify these things about activation.

[Inventive Software]

and btw, you know what ? 1€ ~= 1,24919 US$ here. So, move to Europe guys...Life is cheaper. :D

Even cheaper here in the good ol' United Kingdom! £1 = $1.89!!! So it's around £8 for me! :D:D:D:D:D:D

[oddball]

I have just returned after spending 2 days with my parents and STILL have no software and ZERO response from BetaBoy and ZERO response to my raised tickets. ZERO emails. ZERO response from PayPal too.

ZERO! NOTHING! NADA!

My recommendation is to AVOID this company altogether. I don't care how great your codec is. If you have already paid and have difficulty getting your money back I will not blame you for finding a cracked version when it appears.


This whole thing has been a complete farce from start to finish! I also recommend that when the dust has settled that this thread be closed and any threads about this now DRM infected product be approached with caution by Doom9 members.

[AmbKosh]

I have just returned after spending 2 days with my parents and STILL have no software and ZERO response from BetaBoy and ZERO response to my raised tickets. ZERO emails. ZERO response from PayPal too.

OK. Then it seems I was more in luck than you, oddball. BetaBoy responded to my PMs in this forum in a timely manner. In my profile at CoreAccount I can see my purchase and see my download key. But I'm still not able to download the software, but I hope BetaBoy will fix this soon.

I agree, the ride could have been much more smooth, but I hope the software is worth the waiting.

[oddball]

No he did contact me in the a PM and debugged it as I was logging in apparently so could see what was going on. But still. 2 days to get that link working???

[Inventive Software]

Also bear in mind oddball, that he may not work on a Sunday...... so that's one day you can credit him for NOT working tirelessly just to get one customer his codec working. For all we know, he could have just taken a well-deserved rest. He's taken a lotta stick in this thread (mostly from you it has to be said), so IMO needs Sunday as a time-out, as the good Lord intended. However, he's also in the USA, so he won't start work till 1pm GMT at least (that's East Coast, West Coast add another couple hours).

EDIT: Did you actually request a refund from Betaboy as he said to do if you're having problems?

[Sharktooth]

All those problems wouldnt have happened if Core didnt add all those "restrictions" and useless accounting system.
I'll continue to believe in what i wrote here: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=902416&postcount=2142
... and im glad i decided to wait and didnt buy the thing ...

[BetaBoy]

BetaBoy: My patience is almost exhausted ;)
Still waiting for my update email !

Ginsonic.... PM me the email addy you used you purchase it... thx

[AmbKosh]

BetaBoy: Any news regarding the broken "Download" links in the profile? Do you have an idea, when I will be able to download the software?

[Episodio1]

Why can't Betaboy send the software attached by email to the people having problems downloading it ??

[Sirber]

coz of activation. each installer is custom.
like if I send you mine it won't work.

[Episodio1]

Oh! I thought you entered a serial number and the installer would check it online.

[Shinigami-Sama]

All those problems wouldnt have happened if Core didnt add all those "restrictions" and useless accounting system.
I'll continue to believe in what i wrote here: http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=902416&postcount=2142
... and im glad i decided to wait and didnt buy the thing ...
this is why I never buy brand new software
I wait for all the fools to do all the growing pains for me :)
I dont have a problem with activation as long as it works

that said
I plan on buying this when I start to have time to make use of it
AKA summer+

[Romario]

My recommendation is to AVOID this company altogether. I don't care how great your codec is. If you have already paid and have difficulty getting your money back I will not blame you for finding a cracked version when it appears.

I sorry if some member find my attitude somewhat strange, but oddball is right, all the time. If CoreCodec company can't resolve minor bugs, then they deserve punishment (cracked version on Emule, for example).

[Sirber]

I was more expecting GPU support than DRM infection...

[Isochroma]

@BetaBoy: some thoughts on VMR9 and its colorspace clamping, particularly that it limits YUV output luma to 16-235. How does your DS filter get around this?

[foxyshadis]

Maybe the trouble here is that we need one of these for core... Valve Time (http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Valve_Time) ;)

[G_M_C]

What a sad, sad, turn of events. I was really looking forward to this release. I had my credit card ready to purchase this version. After reading this thread, the credit card is back in my wallet. Another lost sale due to unreasonable DRM.

Me too, but reading all the messages on in this thread has put me of immediatly. As will a lot of others after reading this thread, i suspect.

And the most rediculous side to it is that they'' ve got big problems with the DRM theirselves. Nobody in the entire world has been able to buy stuff from them for many day's now. If the argument is that DRM is implemented so that they hav better revenues, then please recaclulate that idea and include some weeks downtime (and NO SALE).

i think thats all we every going to get from corecodec: no comments on the messed up activation.

i honestly need to say that the minute a hacked version appears on the net i will use it. man, i payed for this an am not able to use it correctly.

When reading further i even realised that CC chose to ignore their users. The lack of support added to my resolve/conclusion NOT TO ADVISE HIS SOFTWARE to anyone who asks about it (at work); Let allone use it myself.

To anyone that is considering this product here is my story.

After Paypal confirmation I was redirected to the registration page. After registering nothing happened except the entry fields were cleared. No confirmation of successful registration no email no NOTHING.

When trying to login into my account it says invalid user or wrong password. When trying to register it says this email address is in use.

This was on the day when v. 1.2 was released. I fired off a few emails explain the situation. The reply was that they had a browser failure and try to login again.

HELLO I can't because I have no valid account. SO again email to explain my situation. I received detailed information on how to log in and click on the download link. The density of CoreAVC support is unsurpassed.

Further explanation and repeat explanation from past email correspondence. This time instructions of a differentkind of login AND click on the link that we send you informing you of the update.

HELLO I am a first time user with version 1.2 Since the day of the release of v 1.2 I have gotten no further with CoreAVC support then a login page that tells me of invalid user registration details.

To all those that post here the BS about CoreAVC being a small company and so forth, they are a business and as a business if they make the decision to implement a disatrous activation scheme for a $15 codec, then they deserve everything that comes with that business decision. They are not in the handout business and if you pay for a product you expect service or the product itself not a long line of excuses and explanations.

Never in my live had I have to deal with such incompetent support that can't get a disastrous roll out fixed.

Off Soapbox and still waiting to download what I paid for almost a week ago.

EDIT:
Just caught up with the posts here and just realized that the problems have just begun with running this piece of software on different partitions or machines. NOT FOR ME Paypal dispute must be escalated to PayPal claim to get your money back. And I will also buy the CPU horsepower to handle the decoding.

Add to my arguments/opinions above the clear fact that customer support that seems worse than that of many othe companies (even Microsoft has a far superiour customer support it seems).

Then the equation is easily made; This software might be good, but the company that sells it makes the software, in this form, to be avoided imho.

I wouldn't be at al surprised if the numer of pirated versions going around will rise steeply ....

Even cheaper here in the good ol' United Kingdom! £1 = $1.89!!! So it's around £8 for me! :D:D:D:D:D:D

I live in Europe too, but i dont like beeing screwed for a mere 8 euro's .... try paying that in Amsterdam's red light district :D

[HookedOnTV]

Is the Vista version available yet?

[Chainmax]

I take it an agreement was never reached to include CoreAVC in XMBC?

[Seb.26]

I take it an agreement was never reached to include CoreAVC in XMBC?
Have you try to add it to the codec list ? ... it's a pure directshow filter ... it could work fine ... ;)

But you will have a problem with activation procedure ... hard to do on classic PC, imagine on xbox ... lol ... try v1.1 or an old one ...

[PS: how funny this thread is ... ]

[Malow]

...but as it stands now, i rather buy a $3000 CPU just to decode with ffmpeg.

i guess a more power CPU and ffdshow will be my savior. i prefer to spend my money donating to help their development... i guess i will have more support... and less "silent"... :o

[blubberbirne]

@ Betaboy

Today i installed Windows new. And now i get the folling error....

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/7294/whatsp8.jpg

[Hans Ohlo]

@ Betaboy

Today i installed Windows new. And now i get the folling error....

http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/7294/whatsp8.jpg
welcome to tha f***ing party!
this is the activation acting up. everytime you change something on your system (i mean installing another os) you will have to contact corecodec and try to convince them that you do not want to install coreavc on another computer.

sick, sad world...

[Romario]

Sad, sad, sad... Very sad, I must say.

I looking forward for BetaBoy answer. If he thinks that DRM infection will stay, he is wrong.

Guys like viodentia will find the way to aviod that STUPID activation.

[clsid]

CoreCodec should just release the source code and add a paypal donate button. That would mean zero complaints, no licensing costs and lots of income.

[bob0r]

But it would make Bill Gates cry.

[ChronoCross]

Sad, sad, sad... Very sad, I must say.

I looking forward for BetaBoy answer. If he thinks that DRM infection will stay, he is wrong.

Guys like viodentia will find the way to aviod that STUPID activation.

If you think a few whiney little forum posters is going to get rid of their activation (it's not DRM) your sadly mistaken. you did not buy a volume license to install it anywhere you like. You bought a single system license for your $20.

Sure this new system has bugs. Did you honestly think that it would run perfectly? For most it has, it only took me about 17 seconds to create an account, login, download, and install it. They will work them out and the activation will work nicely.

You know what the worst thing about you guys is? The fact that your actually encouraging pirates to pirate it and say that you will use it because it is DRM free. Isn't the whole point of this forum to support fair use and NOT Pirating of software. If you don't want to use their activation then don't update. It's as simple as that. Just because you don't like activation does not give you the right to circumvent their activation.

@b0b0r
God man I know you already have a PC with 2 cores that run ridiculously fast and if my single core machine can run BBC HD clips at full speed with only 70% usage do you really need to bitch about not having a full 4 cores?

@sharktooth
I can't believe your so worried about this activation scheme. One would have thought that you would be able to see past this. As I mentioned before you bought it as a single license. The key is that all you have to do is contact corecodec, tell them why you need a new activation and since most people will have legit reasons BAM you get another activation. It's not like they don't have a system in place for you to get it. You can still so what you like it may just take a few more minutes than you would have liked.

@Haali and Betaboy
This release is well worth the wait as it fixes a majority of the issues we saw with the last release. The TS splitter fixes work wonders.

@everyone who filed a paypal complaint
Enjoy buying another $500 worth of hardware for being impatient fools. Anyone who has had a real job (not the mcdonalds that most of you probably work at) will understand the pure number of emails that a company can get on a daily basis. Them being a small company it can take time. The typical turnaround time for most emails is 3-5 days in most companies and they have a good number of people simply working on support.

Everyone Just needs to STFU and move all your complaints to their private email and work out the problem with their staff. That is the only way it's going to get solved.

[Disabled]

I take it an agreement was never reached to include CoreAVC in XMBC?
I dropped having hopes for that (one of the main reasons I supported Core in the first place) since they mentioned activation the first time long time ago.
CoreCodec should just release the source code and add a paypal donate button. That would mean zero complaints, no licensing costs and lots of income.

I would still like to have an officially licenced copy of it, with all royalties payed (that 50ct or what), like I would like to see someone licencing Xvid and such.
I would gladly donate another 20$ if they would OS CoreAVC, but I think the overall income would be less than they get now. I can understand them going CS, but they should do in in a reasonable way and not piss of their loyal customers.

[BetaBoy]

Thanx everyone for their patience...All issues with the Core Account system has been fixed... Users that have had an issue can now login and redownload the installer. Note: We will still have to do some registrations manually and reset some downloads... but we are now moving to send out email notifications next.

The installers now support Vista and notify the user that online actication is occuring so that they can cancel it if they wish.

Haali found a deadlock issue that was fixed and we are now fixing the reported deinterlacing issues... after that it is GPU time ;-)

[JohnnyFu]

Good news, i´m glad that the situation is under control again.

OT: So after all the trouble it´s time for a little party i guess.
Everyone with download and update issues receives reperation in terms of:

A sexy time with Betaboy !!
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/betaboy.jpg:D :D :D

[BetaBoy]

Moo... bring on the dancing monkeys!

I do want to touch on something that if many of the readers of this thread may remember me saying..... We do plan to Open Source CoreAVC at some point next year. No details on that for now.. but alot has to do with tie-ins for our plans on BetaPlayer and CorePlayer.

[Malow]

and the trial???????... no donut for me? :(

o well, at least tell me wen u fix the interlacing issue... again... :rolleyes:

[Ginsonic]

but we are now moving to send out email notifications next

You bring new hope to me.......

[Disabled]

Moo... bring on the dancing monkeys!

I do want to touch on something that if many of the readers of this thread may remember me saying..... We do plan to Open Source CoreAVC at some point next year. No details on that for now.. but alot has to do with tie-ins for our plans on BetaPlayer and CorePlayer.

That sounds fantastic, but I don't see that fit into the strict licence agreements the IP holders force on you and such.
By the way, I still hate activation, so please help me understand why you do it and what they exactly force on you. And please tell me how it locks to my windows copy, IE do you transfer the serial or a hash of it or what?

[Dregelmyller]

***********
but we are now moving to send out email notifications next.
**********


Does that mean we who have not rechived any code will get one ? :D

[Ginsonic]

Does that mean we who have not rechived any code will get one ?
Let us hope so ;) !

[bob0r]

@ChronoCross

My "fast" Intel D930 can NOT decode a BBC-HD 1080MBAFF clip, using deblocking and deinterlacing.
Only with cyberlink GPU support it can, but we all know cyberlink turns off deblocking, so thats the same as CoreAVC.

ffmpeg: deblocking/deinterlacing, but 1 threads
cyberlink: deinterlacing/multiple threads (gpu support), but no deblocking.
coreavc: deblocking,(limited, 2) threads, but no deinterlacing.

CoreAVC should leave the amaturism to me, and start being professionals themself.
And you can never make me stop complaining, whining or limit my voice(typing) in any way, i am dutch, we can't help ourselfs. Freedom is a bitch :cool:


@BetaBoy
I show you again:
Get deinterlacing to work on this: beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts (http://mirror05.x264.nl/public/force.php?file=./beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts) the best (and most horrible) interlaced sample i ever captured from BBC-HD,
and ill link-up to your activation system. (ill just be sure to put in my firewire pci card in first, just to be sure, hehehe)

[Jay Bee]

Thx for the sample, that's the first true interlaced AVC file I've seen on the net. And I confirm, it doesn't deinterlace.

[easy2Bcheesy]

So... I finally have a version of CoreAVC that won't crash my media PC whenever I press the "Stop" button.

The problem is that my media computer is not on my network, and as it is out of range of my WiFi router, it never will be either.

So I can't upgrade - unless I buy a phenomenally long RJ45 cable. Or completely dismantle my home theatre set-up.

I would email but in the past I've never got any response to any email sent to any CoreAVC email address (six emails in total to different addresses) nor a response on the Core Forums, so what's the point?

I've legitimately bought this product but cannot use it. The irony is of course, that I'd be quite happy using the older version - IF IT WORKED PROPERLY. As it is, it doesn't. There was no mention of online activation when I bought 1.1, and indeed there's not even a mention of it on the Upgrade email. If there was, at least I could have avoided buying it in the first place.

I can only hope that sanity prevails at some point in the future. In the meantime, if someone from CoreAVC would like to contact me and make amends (ie get this product I've paid money for to actually WORK), some small measure of faith may be restored in the company.

[tomos]

@ChronoCross

My "fast" Intel D930 can NOT decode a BBC-HD 1080MBAFF clip, using deblocking and deinterlacing.
Only with cyberlink GPU support it can, but we all know cyberlink turns off deblocking, so thats the same as CoreAVC.

ffmpeg: deblocking/deinterlacing, but 1 threads
cyberlink: deinterlacing/multiple threads (gpu support), but no deblocking.
coreavc: deblocking,(limited, 2) threads, but no deinterlacing.

CoreAVC should leave the amaturism to me, and start being professionals themself.
And you can never make me stop complaining, whining or limit my voice(typing) in any way, i am dutch, we can't help ourselfs. Freedom is a bitch :cool:


@BetaBoy
I show you again:
Get deinterlacing to work on this: beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts (http://mirror05.x264.nl/public/force.php?file=./beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts) the best (and most horrible) interlaced sample i ever captured from BBC-HD,
and ill link-up to your activation system. (ill just be sure to put in my firewire pci card in first, just to be sure, hehehe)

i havent tried the decblocking option in coreavc but i had left the deinterlacing off and saw horrible blurs during this clip (the waving arms bit - horrible!)

i turned deinterlacing on and thats gone now. it definetely worked for me - at least as far as this clip goes anyway.

even tried directshowsource and can see the diff big time in vdub. no way this doesnt deinterlace

[Jay Bee]

Had a closer look:

software mode: no deinterlacing.
software double fps: no deinterlacing.
directshow: deinterlacing but only 25 fps instead of 50.

[bob0r]

Yup, its already confirmed by BetaBoy and the core men, i am just saying, that sample should work before i upgrade to activation.

[BetaBoy]

As stated we are working on the deinterlacing issue.... we also dont want to break compliance with other encoders (I'll work on that).

[oddball]

Thanx everyone for their patience...All issues with the Core Account system has been fixed... Users that have had an issue can now login and redownload the installer. Note: We will still have to do some registrations manually and reset some downloads... but we are now moving to send out email notifications next.

The installers now support Vista and notify the user that online actication is occuring so that they can cancel it if they wish.

Haali found a deadlock issue that was fixed and we are now fixing the reported deinterlacing issues... after that it is GPU time ;-)

OK

"Error 10941."

Expecting an email soon. I will cancel my PayPal dispute just as soon as I recieve the software and have it installed.

[sillKotscha]

Expecting an email soon. I will cancel my PayPal dispute just as soon as I recieve the software and have it installed.

you're clearly a customer every shop owner/ company wishes to have...

you won't never get a platinum customer card from my company if I had such cards to offer :sly:

[oddball]

you're clearly a customer every shop owner/ company wishes to have...

you won't never get a platinum customer card from my company if I had such cards to offer :sly:

Bitchy.

[pankov]

Had a closer look:

software mode: no deinterlacing.
software double fps: no deinterlacing.
directshow: deinterlacing but only 25 fps instead of 50.
I'm 99% sure that on my machine it's beeing deinterlaced ... at least the difference from all deinterlace modes and "no deinterlacing" is enormous. I can provide some screenshots if needed.
I'm using CoreAVC Pro 1.1 with GeForce 6600 video card with Forceware 84.21 drivers (as the newer ones are bugy).

[JohnnyFu]

beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts Software-Deinterlacing works fine for me. Klick Screenshots below.
CoreAVC 1.2.0.0 Pro

Software-Deinterlacing
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample-software-deinterlacing_thumb.png (http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample-software-deinterlacing.png)
No-Deinterlacing
http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample-no-deinterlacing_thumb.png (http://home.arcor.de/johnnyfu/screen_shots/beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample-no-deinterlacing.png)

[bob0r]

Not the same frames :p

But cool if it works, i thought betaboy himself (well he did again) said deinterlacing didn't work, i guess on some other interlaced type video.

[Ginsonic]

betaboy: Still no update email. When do You think, You will be able to send them out ?

[DeepBeepMeep]

As stated we are working on the deinterlacing issue.... we also dont want to break compliance with other encoders (I'll work on that).


If you want to make a few people happy and relieve part the tension surrounding this release, you might consider doing these small fixes / additions:
- fix the black level set at a wrong level for some streams (PAFF?)
- fix the reported problem with the Elecard / .x264 muxed streams
- make CoreAVC compatible with Cyberlink (PowerDVD) demuxer. Although Haali filter is getting better and better, it still have some issues with quite a few streams that are broadcasted which doesn"t seem to be the case for Cyberlink.

The sooner you will release a fixed version, the sooner people are likely to forget about their bad experience :). It would add anyway selling points to your product.

[fenomeno83]

I can't pay coreavc with my postepay(registered to paypal!!)!!.It is stupid why with my postepay I buy on ebay!!!Excuse me,but now I will attend a cracked version on emule!!!

[ChronoCross]

I can't pay coreavc with my postepay(registered to paypal!!)!!.It is stupid why with my postepay I buy on ebay!!!Excuse me,but now I will attend a cracked version on emule!!!

lol good job admitting your going to use pirated software. Now all corecodec has to do is DMCA doom9 for your user information and ip. Then DMCA your email address. Then DMCA your ISP.

Why are you people so stupid? I've seen 5 different people say their going to use a pirated version.

How about instead of being retarded and using postepay. Just use PAYPAL. Since this is the only form of payment. Just because postepay is registered to paypal doesn't mean it is automatically useable.

[Mark SS]

Can someone confirm I'm not going nuts here? :)

Using DVBViewer with CoreAVC to watch BBCHD. With overlay the image is too dark although adjustments with Nvidia control panel will compensate but only if I open the control panel each time (don't have to change it again, just open the panel, odd!). With VMR9 colour/brightness is ok but DirectX de-interlacing doesn't appear to be working.

That about the size of it at the moment?

[_xxl]

Do not use a pirated version,switch to open source software!

[KoD]

I think nvidia doesn't really care about video playback but only game performance. Try switching to another driver version, maybe to a 8x.xx one.

[AVmaniac]

I can't pay coreavc with my postepay(registered to paypal!!)!!.It is stupid why with my postepay I buy on ebay!!!Excuse me,but now I will attend a cracked version on emule!!!

what's your problem .. get a payPal account and buy the software!

:angry:

It worked fine for me and for the rest of the grateful core-customers as well

[bwlonsdale]

I bought the software while it was 1.1 for my Athlon 64-3200 (single core).

It was only after I bought it did I discover the playback issue with media center edition and media player - i.e. it locked up and had to do an end task to get out of it.

So...I wait for an update as Beta Boy said that it would be addressed in the next release.

9 months later a new version comes out - I get the e-mail, download and install it. Log onto Media PC, download and install and get told it's already activated.

Uninstall from main PC where I downloaded it onto and installed. Try installing again on Media PC - same shi* - already activated.

Come to Doom-9 and read the only thing that's taken them 9 months is introduce activation which is broken.

Raise trouble ticket with Core on their swanky new website (I can only wait for the day I need to use that calculator on there). First email response I get asks me for my order number!! Why they can't look it up on their swanky new website bolloc*s is beyond me, but that's the price for staying legal I suppose. So, I send them my order ID and two days later no response.

I try again today to download the installer from the website - ooh, now I get a message telling me it's going to spyware me up and send some details off to their activation server. Then still same message, I'm already activated have a nice day, sod off.

Then notice banner at top of swanky new website saying their database has lost all the trouble tickets and need to re-enter the details of problem. Seriously, final straw with this.

The problem is these people don't give a rat's ass for customer service. Beta Boy, if you're reading this, your company exemplifies stupidity. There'll be a Dilbert made out of your company in the future.

Please do me one last favour before I go off and forget your company exists - rename the installer file would you?

From "coreavc_professional_edition.exe" to "coreavc_amateur_cobblers_we've_got_your_cash_anyway_hahahahaha.exe"

[ChronoCross]

mm another idiot to add to the pile.

[bwlonsdale]

That's right, ChronoCross - I agree 100% - I am a complete idiot for buying into the idea of Core products.

[ChronoCross]

actually an idiot for that entire paragraph of crap you wrote.

For one you bought a single license. not a volume license to install it on as many PC's as you like. It's obvious that the thing worked on your main PC and then failed on your media center PC. Why do you think that is? Already Activated because you ALREADY INSTALLED IT!!!!

That is why your post is idiotic because you think you should be able to install it on 10000000 PC's for $20. Every company on the planet has the same single user license idea. Core is no different.

[Romario]

I will wait when CoreAVC become freeware product, somewhere in second half of 2007.

Until then, ffdshow is only choice for me.

[Manao]

ChronoCross : 9 months later a new version comes out - I get the e-mail, download and install it. Log onto Media PC, download and install and get told it's already activated.

Uninstall from main PC where I downloaded it onto and installed. Try installing again on Media PC - same shi* - already activated.Read the post of the others, before insulting them.

[Sirber]

I uninstalled it and gonna forget all about it.

[ChronoCross]

ChronoCross : Read the post of the others, before insulting them.

Already did. But it's activated already. The Activation isn't mobile. It's supposed to be bound to a single machine. Install, Uninstall Install Uninstall. to think that you can make that transference as often as you like is a tad ridiculous. That would be like saying "This machine is off right now so I can use XP on this other machine because I'm not using it right now but may do so at a later date.

It would be a different situation if he downloaded it to his machine and it didn't work in the first place. But it did work and was activated and bound to the machine. So he should have to follow the procedure for getting a new activation. Else the activation would be pointless.

[bwlonsdale]

You kind of missed the point - I did follow the process and raised a trouble ticket - and now when I try to find out why I've had no more response for two days, there's a message up saying they lost all the trouble tickets. It's ridiculous - this isn't support, it's a farce.

No one was warned there was activation which is why I downloaded and installed it onto my main PC - there's still no suggestion on the new installer that it's tied to one PC. Nada...zip...nothing. Which is exactly what Core are saying on the activation issue. Oh, hang on - they said they were forced to pis* people off by the "IP Rights Holders".

It should have been called "Carry On Core" - with Beta Boy playing Kenneth Williams' part.

[ChronoCross]

To think that the core account system would have no glitches is just sad. There is no way to work out all the bugs till something is released to the public.

I think you missed the point of activation. It actually saves you money. It's the reason they can offer free upgrades. But no one bothered to pay attention to that point.

Granted the first installer lacked mention of the activation but a majority of the people who bought core read doom9....and it was mentioned several times here.

The problems weren't widespread either. Sure it happened to a few people and they worked the bugs out with them but for some people it went smoothly. 17 seconds is how long it took me to create an account, login, download, and install the file. But sadly no one else has posted what a great experience it was. People only post in this thread when they have to whine about something they don't like. This is unfair to a company that has actually produced a quality product. ffdshow sure as hell can't play most of the HD files I have and this product doesn't crash either like some others. It can only get better.

So how about we find some positive things to say. How about the fact that they fixed alot of bugs, and those that didn't have already been reported, samples achieved and work begun on another round of patches to cover every single different type of file and way of doing things.

People generally lack the understanding as to how difficult it is to prepare for every single OS, The differences between them and to make sure things are compatible. Even major companies have a hard time keeping up. Just think how small Core is right now, it takes a rather substantial amount of time to work out these issues, communicate with clients, communicate with devs, etc.

How about we give them a break for once. I think too many of doom9's members are spoiled by free and open source and forget that everyone needs money to live.

[Jay Bee]

actually an idiot for that entire paragraph of crap you wrote.

For one you bought a single license. not a volume license to install it on as many PC's as you like. It's obvious that the thing worked on your main PC and then failed on your media center PC. Why do you think that is? Already Activated because you ALREADY INSTALLED IT!!!!

That is why your post is idiotic because you think you should be able to install it on 10000000 PC's for $20. Every company on the planet has the same single user license idea. Core is no different.

This post is a load of bollocks. Software companies can offer licences in any way they see fit. For a video decoder I think most people would agree that more than one machine per user would be reasonable. Or at least a way to transfer from one machine to another.

How about we give them a break for once. I think too many of doom9's members are spoiled by free and open source and forget that everyone needs money to live.

Most of the people complaining are paying customers so what's your point?

[ChronoCross]

This post is a load of bollocks. Software companies can offer licences in any way they see fit. For a video decoder I think most people would agree that more than one machine per user would be reasonable. Or at least a way to transfer from one machine to another.


hmm already there. Just open a ticket, provide a valid reason, and bam, new license. As for the what you think is reasonable may not be what the patent holder sees as reasonable.


Most of the people complaining are paying customers so what's your point?

Keyword being most. Even if you are a paying customer going onto a forum and bitching about it rather than emailing the company and opening a support ticket is childish and accomplishes nothing other than making the company look bad all because a select few are having problems.

I don't think buying the software gives you unlimited rights to do whatever you want with it.

[fenomeno83]

what's your problem .. get a payPal account and buy the software!

:angry:

It worked fine for me and for the rest of the grateful core-customers as well

I have a paypal account(in whitch my postepay is registered)but I can't pay with it!!!

[3ngel]

This is a farce. On a forum which stands for free media, their own members introduce drm. Can this thread please be closed.

Apart from all the problems, and ANTI-DRM posts i agreed in toto, i too think this is SIMPLY RIDICULOUS.

On doom9.org web home we see such ironics comments about HD-Video DRM, music DRM, anything DRM with a STRONG and CLEAR position ANTI-DRM, so what we got here?

A 1200 posts thread on a product that is TOTALLY DRM?

We are joking here?

CoreAVC is now as identical as an adobe product, or a Microsoft product. So we are going to open threads on those products?

Why CoreAVC don't f**cks off on their own support forum, and discute all their DRM s*its, leaving us users to discuss software that are RESPECTFUL of us users?

I repeat. Why this Support thread on a DRM Product is still not closed?

[ChronoCross]

because product activation is not DRM.

DRM is restricting the usage of a product for which you own the license.

You purchased a single machine license and no matter what you say you shouldn't be able to freely move it to wherever you like.

This is not a ANTI-DRM forum either. You miss the point of the arguement. IT's ANTI-Over Restrictive DRM. The whole point of this forum is to discuss the ways that DRM should be implemented in order to allow playback on the most number of devices while still protecting the companies IP. To completely rid the world of DRM is basically saying it's okay to pirate.

If someone would develop a decent DRM scheme then we wouldn't have all this ANTI-DRM crap.

[bwlonsdale]

To think that the core account system would have no glitches is just sad. There is no way to work out all the bugs till something is released to the public.

Are you having a laugh?? What do you think QA stands for? Why no timed betas that expired or had to be activated prior to the release to the public - at least that would have given them time to iron out any kinks in their website/activation process? They had a system working just fine and dandy with v1.1 - you just don't get it. Why add activation during a POINT release? Yes, they fixed bugs - they have a responsibility and duty to fix bugs. You don't pay for software thinking you're buying the bugs and any hassle that goes with it. To add activation at the same time as you're rolling out new software.....well, they've got some big balls on them I'll give them that.

I think you missed the point of activation. It actually saves you money. It's the reason they can offer free upgrades. But no one bothered to pay attention to that point.

The upgrades aren't free - I paid for them to fix bugs that might come up in the software when I paid for 1.1 and I damn well expect they'll fix them.

Granted the first installer lacked mention of the activation but a majority of the people who bought core read doom9....and it was mentioned several times here.

I don't camp out on Doom9 waiting with baited breath to see what Beta Boy is going post next. After reading a large part of this post the other night (after I'd already installed it and was subsequently damned) - there was NO mention of it tying the license to ONE PC prior to the software release. Prove me wrong and link to the post that states it does that - the post before 1.2 was released to the public, NOT AFTER.

I got an email from Core advising of the upgrade - I log in to their website, sign up for an account and download the software and install it - there was ZERO mention of activation, let alone it being tied to ONE PC. I don't expect to have to come to Doom 9, or their forums, or their website or anywhere else to have to find out it does that. It should have been in the e-mail they sent OR it should be in the installer notice, none of which happened.

The problems weren't widespread either. Sure it happened to a few people and they worked the bugs out with them but for some people it went smoothly. 17 seconds is how long it took me to create an account, login, download, and install the file. But sadly no one else has posted what a great experience it was. People only post in this thread when they have to whine about something they don't like. This is unfair to a company that has actually produced a quality product. ffdshow sure as hell can't play most of the HD files I have and this product doesn't crash either like some others. It can only get better.

Just reading this forum and Beta Boy's own comments should make you realise that the launch was a disaster for them. For their new system and most of all for their reputation. Being a small company does NOT make them immune from criticism - and they deserve every bit of it they're getting right now.

So how about we find some positive things to say. How about the fact that they fixed alot of bugs, and those that didn't have already been reported, samples achieved and work begun on another round of patches to cover every single different type of file and way of doing things.

Something positive?............I'm struggling.

People generally lack the understanding as to how difficult it is to prepare for every single OS, The differences between them and to make sure things are compatible. Even major companies have a hard time keeping up. Just think how small Core is right now, it takes a rather substantial amount of time to work out these issues, communicate with clients, communicate with devs, etc.

Are the activation issues to do with the OS it's being installed on? Who said that? Beta Boy....Core? Are they blaming Microsoft now?

How about we give them a break for once. I think too many of doom9's members are spoiled by free and open source and forget that everyone needs money to live.

How dare you claim Doom 9 members are spoiled - it's a community far larger than Core. Many people on here give their good time and effort to create and support projects which are far more deserving than a $20 codec.

[3ngel]

DRM is restricting the usage of a product for which you own the license.
That's exactly the point.
If i switch computer (broken or update) and have STILL 1 machine Why i have to download again, or send informations over the line?
That's a restricting the usage, and the FREEDOM OF USAGE that is the same.
Sorry but your arguing is a lost war.
And because there is a no decent DRM scheme, at the moment i still think they have to go away from this forum, 'cause at this moment they are going against this forum rule that is against

restricting the usage of a product for which you own the license.

Do you think all the complaints in past posts are not restricting enough the usage of the product?


PS:
Oh, and just a silly and funny consideration of mine. GOD is a DAMNED 20$ CODEC not an Operating System or 2000$ software. Dont' you feel ridiculous to put up all this paranoid DRM thougts for a CODEC? It makes me laugh thinking about it :)

[KoD]

I wonder if anyone is allowed to mention Vista then... our new DRM overlord.

[3ngel]

PPS:
Oh i almost forgot...
This is the best prank in the history of internet.
A software that builds up from scratch on the shoulders of users, and then it turns totally against them :D

[sjchmura]

The only DRM scheme I like is the XBOX Live model - it really is fair, prevents piracy on the 360 and works

1. You own the right to use it - anywhere anytime.
2. You can login, download you TV show and as long as you are logged in it works - same for games
3. If your HD blows up - who cares - download again.
4. 2 copies are allowed

So while not perfect, it lets the user have the license. The idea that my MCE machine and my Laptop need 2 licenses when I will never use them at the same time is crazy. CoreCodec sounds great. But come on - MCE + your laptop is not asking for too much.

ANyway it is irrelevant really. This will piss off those of us who buy software and music and someone will crack it in 1 day to be followed by 100 strings of cracks and re-releases.

[Sirber]

Steam is really cool too.

1. I can always redownload and use what I buy.
2. I can use on multiple computers, while I'm logged with my account.
3. I can burn the games (backup).
4. I can have fun ;)

[3ngel]

I wonder, why CoreAVC acted so stupid?
StarForce3 has been unprotected, how much time do you think it will take to uprotect yours?
In this way you have accomplished those things:
1) You have lost ALL THE RESPECTS this forum users had for you
2) You have accomplished nothing 'cause your so fatigued DRM will be unprotected

You could do a GREAT figure, just putting it at payment.
I pay, i download, dot. End.
You were almost obliged to do this, to the respect for us forum members that helped to develop your product.
No one would have complained. What is right is right.
But at the moment, you're full of laugh from head to feet in any direction.
And what's worse you try to show you don't notice :)

(And the real problem is that this thread is still opened)

[Inventive Software]

Why add activation during a POINT release?
Please ask Microsoft the same question and see if you get the same response as CoreCodec (if they reply), as that's basically what they did with SP2, introducing Genuine Advantage. I don't remember this fuss with Adobe introducing activation (which I totally agree with Chronocross ISN'T DRM!!!! Properly research DRM and you'll be proved right!) in their products, so why the fuss for a codec that costs at most $20 and plays back H.264 faster than any publically available solution? Activation is designed to tie a product to a system. You don't complain when Microsoft or Adobe or another company does it, but CoreCodec and all the barrels start pointing!!!!!

I log in to their website, sign up for an account and download the software and install it
Did you read the EULA all the way through it, or just click "I accept" and rush through like most people? IT PAYS TO READ THESE THINGS ALL THE WAY THROUGH AS THEY CONTAIN ALL THE LICENSE INFORMATION YOU NEED!!!!!

@3ngel: :goodpost: re prank / backlash.

[ChronoCross]

The Open Source Generation is really sad. Most of you think that everything should be free. I'm sure most of you dont realize that the reason xvid cannot sell their codec or even create official builds is because of patents. It's the same reason there are no official x264 builds.

CoreAVC 1.0 cost you $20.
Without Activation 1.2 would cost you another $20.


Because of activation and the restrictions put in place they can provide us the updates for free without having to pay the distribution license again.


That's exactly the point.
If i switch computer (broken or update) and have STILL 1 machine Why i have to download again, or send informations over the line?
That's a restricting the usage, and the FREEDOM OF USAGE that is the same.
Sorry but your arguing is a lost war.
And because there is a no decent DRM scheme, at the moment i still think they have to go away from this forum, 'cause at this moment they are going against this forum rule that is against


Because you paid for it does not mean you can freely move it to any machine any time. It's only supposed to be used ona single machine. What would stop people from distributing the file? Why do you think Core lost so much money in the last release. It's the complete ANTI-DRM movement that allows piracy to continue.

Although there is no perfect DRM yet Core's alternative is the best available option for them to continue providing free updates. To say that they shouldn't put in activation is like telling them to fuck the customer even more and to just stop making updates.

Where in the hell did you find this no DRM rule? I'd be interested to see it as I haven't seen it in the forul rules page. the ANTI-DRM is an OPINION not a RULE.

http://forum.doom9.org/forum-rules.htm


How dare you claim Doom 9 members are spoiled - it's a community far larger than Core. Many people on here give their good time and effort to create and support projects which are far more deserving than a $20 codec.


Then stop buying Cores software. If you don't like what they are doing then bitch to one of your more deserving products to become as fast. Additionally a Majority of doom9's USERS are spoiled. There is a big separation between users and DEVELOPERS (you guys know who you are and whom I respect for their work).


Are the activation issues to do with the OS it's being installed on? Who said that? Beta Boy....Core? Are they blaming Microsoft now?


There was a problem with vista. Unfortunately this OS isn't even out in full version. BTW you need to stop talking about your activation issues because you have none. You just lack the ability to understand a single-user license.


Are you having a laugh?? What do you think QA stands for?


hmm did you miss the part where only a select number of users were having issues? It was a bug that creeped up once more than 10 or so users logged on. Do you think they have a QA team of like 500? How are they supposed to test every single person. You'd think that they would quit after they tested it a few times. Oh well you';ve probably never developed software before so you don't know anything about "Random Features".

Perhaps I'm the only one that had a good quick experience with CoreAVC and it's activation, I doubt it however as I'm sure the number of happy people to the number of disappointed people is 99% in favor of happy people.

[Episode]

This is getting way off-topic now, maybe you guys should continue this discussion on another thread and save this one for people who are really trying to get some customer support from BetaBoy.

@ChronoCross, you should also respect rule #4 and try not to insult our forum members. I've seen you doing so several times on this thread alone. Insults and profanity just don't belong on this forum.

[3ngel]

@ChronoCross
Unfortunately you're totally mind burned, if you think that after i PAY for a software, and my computer is damaged, i have to redownload to put it on another machine OF MINE, that SUBSTITUTES the old machine. I'm still using one machine.

I pay for 1 machine not for

Themachineinstalledatthe13.45on21november2006whichhadinstalled5programswith4windowsopenedwith20gigshardrivespaceinphaseofdefragmentingbutalittlelowoncpucausetherewasaprobleminthememorymodulethatwaslittleoverheated

You understand? I dont' think so.
You have read my last post? I dont' think so.
You could understand my last post? I dont' think so.

It's useless to reply to you.

[Inventive Software]

@Bond: recommend a split for CoreCodec rants.

[ChronoCross]

@ChronoCross
Unfortunately you're totally mind burned, if you think that after i PAY for a software, and my computer is damaged, i have to redownload to put it on another machine OF MINE, that SUBSTITUTES the old machine. I'm still using one machine.

I pay for 1 machine not for

Themachineinstalledatthe13.45on21november2006whichhadinstalled5programswith4windowsopenedwith20gigshardrivespaceinphaseofdefragmentingbutalittlelowoncpucausetherewasaprobleminthememorymodulethatwaslittleoverheated

You understand? I dont' think so.
You have read my last post? I dont' think so.
You could understand my last post? I dont' think so.

It's useless to reply to you.

The problem is I did read it and it's not very bright. They never said you cannot move it to another machine. All you have to do is open a support ticket. You can move it while their activation prevents pirating.

It's not like it's permanently locked into the machine for all time.

[3ngel]

All you have to do is open a support ticket
So, if i want to reinstall 20times on 20 different machines a day ('cause all 20 are broken), i have to show all my movements to them anytime?
Dont' be ridiculous. Where is the privacy? Where is my liberty of use?

[ChronoCross]

So, if i want to reinstall 20times on 20 different machines a day ('cause all 20 are broken), i have to show all my movements to them anytime?
Dont' be ridiculous. Where is the privacy? Where is my liberty of use?

now you've just proven how ridiculous an idea your view on freedom is. Trying to prove a point with an unrealistic situation is unbelieveable.

you have no privacy. They already have all the information they will ask of you anyway. All you have to do is tell them why you want to reinstall it. Seems reasonable to any sane person.

[3ngel]

All you have to do is tell them why you want to reinstall it.
AHAHAHA you're totally f***ed up :D
Byeeeeee

[ChronoCross]

AHAHAHA you're totally f***ed up :D
Byeeeeee

sad sentence for a sad paranoid little child.

[Cryptum]

Seems reasonable to any sane person

Very very reasonable yes ...

Da Cryptum

[G_M_C]

I will wait when CoreAVC become freeware product, somewhere in second half of 2007.

Until then, ffdshow is only choice for me.

The wisest comment in the last 20 or so posts. FFDSHOW is a good enough alternative for now, untill CoreAVC turns Open source.

And to ChronoCross: You seem to be personally affected by all peopel who are against this activation sceme. If you take a few breaths you will realize that most people here actually don't seem to mind paying for the software, in fact most of them have payed allready. It's the copy-protection-management-sceme (aka the DRM) that everybody is all irritated about, not the fact that there is a protection sceme (aka its only about THIS way of DRM).

If I buy software, then it is, AND WILL ALLWAYS BE my buisness where i install it and on wich system. On the same idea, it will allways be my buisness when i want to transfer the software to another machine (mind you transfer, so not installing it on a 2nd machine as you are on about, since i UNinstall it from the first machine). Since that is my legal right, i do not have to ask permission to some kind of CoreAVC-police, trying to get info on my machine, information wich Core has no legal right to. Actually i think this software-protection-sceme might not even be legal, because of the informationgathering etc.

Anyway; I think CC will lose a lot of customers this way. But if thats their buisness-model .... Another company will take over without these issues, because they realize that having customer-satisfaction is about 90% of making a sucessful profitable buissness.

[ChronoCross]

Once again....it's not DRM. Why is it that most people don't know what DRM is?

Here's a question for all you anti-activation people: How the f*ck is core supposed to protect their product?

[Sirber]

Digital Rights Management - Technologies to give content providers control over redistribution and access to material.
Like it or not, Activation = DRM

[oddball]

"Once again....it's not DRM. Why is it that most people don't know what DRM is?

Here's a question for all you anti-activation people: How the f*ck is core supposed to protect their product?"

I respect a company that sells an honest product at an honest price. I could have gone and grabbed the cracked version if I wanted to which is bound to appear sooner or later. However I believe that if something is worth buying then I will pay for it.

Anyhow. I have now escalated my PayPal dispute to an actual claim. It has been 7 days since I paid for this 'vaporware'. Rarely have I had to deal with such incompetence from a seller/company.

I have lost all interest in this 'product'. I just want my refund and nothing more to do with it.

Take this as a warning to anyone who thinks companies have a right in 'protecting' their 'intellectual property' with these crackpot activation schemes and DRM viruses. All it leads to in the end is extra hardship on the legitimate customer. Anyone with the smarts probably can get an unrestricted version for free anyhow. It's not like it's made out of gold bullion or anything. It's just a bloody codec for Pete's sake!

I'm sorry but I've had enough of this BS!

[G_M_C]

Once again....it's not DRM. Why is it that most people don't know what DRM is?

Here's a question for all you anti-activation people: How the f*ck is core supposed to protect their product?

That is not my buissness, and ok lets not call it DRM, lets call it CC's Protection System for all i care.

I, and most others, accept the fact that they have to protect their interests somehow, but the way it is implemented now causes too much problems.

It not only causes problems for the users, but for CC too; Their customer support is completely overrun and cannot cope, and they cant sell anything of their webstite while shipping updates because this protection-sceme causes a massive amount of work for them.

So it is clear that this system does not work. I dont invent the copy-protection scemes, thats something they have to do themselves. But to me it is clear, in this form its completely faulty.

[oddball]

And to ChronoCross: You seem to be personally affected by all peopel who are against this activation sceme. If you take a few breaths you will realize that most people here actually don't seem to mind paying for the software, in fact most of them have payed allready. It's the copy-protection-management-sceme (aka the DRM) that everybody is all irritated about, not the fact that there is a protection sceme (aka its only about THIS way of DRM).


If I had actually received the software I had paid for I might well have bitten my tongue about the activation thing. But they cannot even supply me with the actual goods!

[ChronoCross]

Like it or not, Activation = DRM

mmm did you notice the wording of it......guess not.

[Sirber]

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/2049/coreavclj0.png

New installer

[3ngel]

and ok lets not call it DRM
No, we CALL IT DRM by its name because

as already said from WikiPedia

Digital Rights Management - Technologies to give content providers control over redistribution and access to material.

Activation gives control over redistribution. Activation is DRM.

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/2049/coreavclj0.png

DITTO

[clsid]

CoreAVC 1.0 cost you $20.
Without Activation 1.2 would cost you another $20.
BULLSHIT. Are we making up facts now? :mad:

The ONLY reason CoreCodec added Internet based activation is to prevent piracy. It has NOTHING to do with MPEG licensing. They don't have to pay extra licensing costs for upgrades.
Licensing only costs $0.20 per unit. No licensing costs have to be paid for the first 100,000 units that are sold in each year!!!!!! SOURCE (http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html)


An issue with activation is that whenever CoreCodec goes out of business or if their servers blow up, then you can no longer (re-)install their product. The same issue exist with DRM (so in that sense they are similar). There already have been known cases of online stores where people could buy DRM protected music, stores that now no longer exist, rendering all of the legally bought music from those stores totally unusable.

[ChronoCross]

MM quoting wikipedia. good thing this isn't a place of higher learning or you would have gotten an F. That definition is misleading as to what DRM really is. The activation is missing the thing that makes DRM DRM. Do some research and I'm sure you'll figure it out someday.

You still didn't answer my question.......how are they supposed to protect their product?

[3ngel]

If we all would know that the only interest of CoreCodec would be to protect their interest we all FOR SURE would not have been partecipating to its development.
And if it's the case, i'm waiting for nth time that this thread would be closed as soon as. Its a shame for all doom9.

[Cryptum]

You still didn't answer my question.......how are they supposed to protect their product?

Like almost all normal software. With a protected source code and a serial. That's it, and that's enough !!

Da Cryptum

[ChronoCross]

If we all would know that the only interest of CoreCodec would be to protect their interest we all FOR SURE would not have been partecipating to its development.
And if it's the case, i'm waiting for nth time that this thread would be closed as soon as. Its a shame for all doom9.

You do know why it's not closed right? Cause it doesn't violate any forum rules. lol.

anyone who participated in the development knew it was for a commercial end.....that was never a secret.

[ChronoCross]

Like almost all normal software. With a protected source code and a serial. That's it, and that's enough !!

Da Cryptum

you mean the serials that everyone has access to once on the internet? That seems to work real well to stop piracy.

[3ngel]

anyone who participated in the development knew it was for a commercial end
Oh, yes for sure, not that i would have to tell them on which WC i put my ass when i have to defecate.

That seems to work real well to stop piracy.
God you're such an ignorant... with what courage you dare to speak...

[ChronoCross]

Oh, yes for sure, not that i would have to tell them on which WC i put my ass when i have to defecate.


God you're such an ignorant... with what courage you dare to speak...

mmmm pot calling the kettle black.

Nice and childish shit reference.

You still didn't answer my question smartass.

[3ngel]

You still didn't answer my question smartass.
They have already replied to you f***ing blind

Like almost all normal software. With a protected source code and a serial. That's it, and that's enough !!

And this is for your f****ing ignorance

StarForce3 has been unprotected, how much time do you think it will take to uprotect yours?
.....
2) You have accomplished nothing 'cause your so fatigued DRM will be unprotected

[Cryptum]

That seems to work real well to stop piracy.

Like DRM. Look for Adobe, Microsoft products and Co lol ...
You don't understand that it's impossible to stop piracy, i mean IMPOSSIBLE !

Da Cryptum

[clsid]

you mean the serials that everyone has access to once on the internet? That seems to work real well to stop piracy.
Either you are really smart or 99% of all software companies are really stupid.

It is impossible to stop piracy. The goal of running a company is maximizing revenue. Bad support and things like activation can and will scare off customers.

[ChronoCross]

Either you are really smart or 99% of all software companies are really stupid.

It is impossible to stop piracy. The goal of running a company is maximizing revenue. Bad support and things like activation can and will scare off customers.

I;m just saying statistics show how much companies lose to piracy with serials. At least core is trying. Those other things do the same thing and yet no one stops buying the product. Microsoft products are giant pieces of DRM but has that stopped anyone? no.

I would rather have this activation than a stupid serial key. Cause then Iwould have a serial key and the off chance that someone figures out my key and now I don't have a prodcut to use cause they think I'm pirating it. That happened alot back in my gaming days with keys. At least with the activation I know my purchase is bound to my computer.

[3ngel]

I would rather have this activation than a stupid serial key.
Because you're one of those girlies who go around attached to T-Bag in prison break? :)

[ChronoCross]

Because you're one of those girlies who go around attached to T-Bag in prison break? :)

I enjoyed reading the prison break response. Unfortunately for you it pretty much took away any credibility your argument might have had. Now your nothing but a small blip in this thread by which you gave none of your own opinion and simply rehashed what everyone else said.....so you ever plan on telling us how you think core should protect their IP?

[Cryptum]

Because you're one of those girlies who go around attached to T-Bag in prison break?

:D :D

Too funny :D

I enjoyed reading the prison break response. Unfortunately for you it pretty much took away any credibility your argument might have had. Now your nothing but a small blip in this thread by which you gave none of your own opinion and simply rehashed what everyone else said.....so you ever plan on telling us how you think core should protect their IP?

But you, you don't have really some good argument, so ..

Da Cryptum

[tomos]

MM quoting wikipedia. good thing this isn't a place of higher learning or you would have gotten an F. That definition is misleading as to what DRM really is. The activation is missing the thing that makes DRM DRM. Do some research and I'm sure you'll figure it out someday.

You still didn't answer my question.......how are they supposed to protect their product?


woah! lots of bad feeling in this thread guys.

as for the above question - why should consumers answer it? it's not our problem. protecting the product is the concern of those who produce it - not those who buy it.

all that matters to me as a comsumer is that i don't have any hassle using/installing/reinstalling that program.

if it comes out that i have the hassles mentioned above, then i will use a blag copy of the program since as someone who has legally bought coreavc, i don't see why i should have to put up with the hassle when people who pirate the program won't have any problems at all.

[3ngel]

@Chronocross
Eheh i'm glad you enjoyed (and understand) the prison break statement.

Well little girl, for your question

how you think core should protect their IP?

that's the answer
You don't understand that it's impossible to stop piracy, i mean IMPOSSIBLE !

and

It is impossible to stop piracy. The goal of running a company is maximizing revenue. Bad support and things like activation can and will scare off customers.

[ChronoCross]

Even if you did purchase coreavc using a pirated version actually would void your license. As it's a violation of the AUP.

So basically your response is to give up protecting the product and just encourage piracy. It may not be able to be stopped but you can sure as hell show your doing something about it. You would just have them just put a copy of the full version on the site for free and not charge anything and simply just let everyone use it without activation......good business plan there genius. I wonder why more comapnies don't take this approach......oh that's right, their actually interested in making money.

[Cryptum]

So basically your response is to give up protecting the product and just encourage piracy. It may not be able to be stopped but you can sure as hell show your doing something about it. You would just have them just put a copy of the full version on the site for free and not charge anything and simply just let everyone use it without activation......good business plan there genius. I wonder why more comapnies don't take this approach......oh that's right, their actually interested in making money.

Nope like i said. Just a protected source code (very hard protected but it don't means a constraining software/product) and a serial. Like 99% company do.

Da Cryptum

[ChronoCross]

Nope like i said. Just a protected source code (very hard protected but it don't means a constraining software/product) and a serial. Like 99% company do.

Da Cryptum

wasn't talking to you. you gave a good answer. the other guy did not.

Even though the key thing is flawed and overused and sends data to their servers anyway (compares to a list of fake/comprmised keys)

[3ngel]

Just a protected source code (very hard protected but it don't means a constraining software/product) and a serial. Like 99% company do.

Sancta.

(compares to a list of fake/comprmised keys)
Mmm... pheraps you're quite in it doesn't it? :D

[ChronoCross]

Sancta.


Mmm... pheraps you're quite in it doesn't it? :D


english motherf*cker...do you speak it?

[Sirber]

guys, take it easy. Strikes might come...

[ChronoCross]

guys, take it easy. Strikes might come...


lol it's a movie quote. I didn't understand the sentence so I pulled a pulp fiction quote.

[3ngel]

Sancta
From latin "Sancta Verba" means "Holy words"

Now, knee on chickpeas for all the bull**its you've said! :)

[ChronoCross]

I meant this

Mmm... pheraps you're quite in it doesn't it?


I knew what the first one meant......

[3ngel]

Thats mean that if you know about fake/comprmised keys you probably are expert "in the argument".

[ChronoCross]

it's a common knowledge practice. Not an indication of my pirating use. it's what windows genuine advantage is based on.

[CiNcH]

I don't mind wheter it is DRM or not.

Fact is, what's happening here is funny and ridiculous. With such attitude and incompetence (restrictive activation, "promises" like hardware acceleration, a trial version, delays and other things that caused a lot of discussions here) you simply lose potential customers and upset already customers, having this said from an objective point of view...

Even without thinking about the little faux-pas I have just dropped the idea of buying CoreAVC because I simply do not want to be restricted in that way. I do not mind why it is restricted, whether it is because of licencing, piracy matters or whatever.

Just decide for yourself whether all this is ok.

[clsid]

I;m just saying statistics show how much companies lose to piracy with serials. At least core is trying. Those other things do the same thing and yet no one stops buying the product. Microsoft products are giant pieces of DRM but has that stopped anyone? no.
Please post a reliable source where we can find such statistics. Don't bother to post stats like "1 pirated download equals 1 sale less", because every sane person know that is BS.

[clsid]

A legal copy of CoreAVC Pro 1.2: $14.95
3 bottles of coca cola regular: $4
2 bags of potato chips: $2
Spending 5 hours to crack the activation: $0

Uploading a torrent to piratebay: PRICELESS

[ChronoCross]

http://archive.gamespy.com/asp/image.asp?/legacy/articles/piracy/chart3.jpg

simple yet effective graph.

I'm glad that everyone in this thread supports piracy so much.....

[Inventive Software]

@clsid: :goodpost: That's a good one! :D:D:D:D:D

CAN EVERYBODY PLEASE WATCH THEIR LANGUAGE AND CUT THE PROFANITY? IT'S A FAMILY FORUM.

I can't believe you're arguing over this. Note that Betaboy's not even responded to this. He's probably laughing his ass off at you lot bickering over another product with activation.

And oddball: I'm sorry to hear you just want out.

No doubt Dan will eventually sort the teething problems of their activation system, (which they are, OK? New system, new problems, it's the norm, live with it.) but I suspect that it's just because they got swamped and the server cried "ENOUGH". It happens, the only solution is waiting. Filing complaints is all well and good, but not all customer service is exemplary; CoreCodec just happens to be near the bottom of the barrel in this, which is a little unfortunate.

Like I said before about 200 posts ago (yes, that's how good the spam is in this thread :D), I'll wait till around Xmas before I think about purchasing it. But again, like Romario, I may wait till it goes open source some time next year. I can make do with ffdshow cause I deal with SD content at the moment.

[Sirber]

Spending 5 hours to crack the activation: $0

I bypassed the activation system. Took me 20 minutes. I emailed BetaBoy about it with my 11 steps tutorial.

I will not share the tutorial so don't bother asking for it.
All I can say is that it's easy.

Been a great learn though :)

[clsid]

I said a reliable source. Not some lame graph by the RIAA equivalent of the software industry.

It does not contain any empirical data that shows how the level of protection relates to the amount of piracy. That's the issue at discussion here. Nor does it show any empirical evidence that the guestimated losses are actual losses.

There have been independent studies (I'm to lazy to go and find a link) that show that a significant amount of people who pirate music also buy more legal music. Those additional sales more than compensated for the reduction in sales caused by other groups of music pirates. It is fairly likely that the same holds true for software. First you download a cracked version, try it, like it, and buy it. Or convince your boss at work to buy a volume license. (most software revenue comes from businesses)


I bypassed the activation system. Took me 20 minutes. I emailed BetaBoy about it with my 11 steps tutorial.

I will not share the tutorial so don't bother asking for it.
All I can say is that it's easy.

Been a great learn though :)
I guess the 20 minutes was without eating chips and drinking lots of cola :D
Why share with BetaBoy and not with the rest of us? :devil:

[Cryptum]

I'm glad that everyone in this thread supports piracy so much.....

You're welcome :)

bypassed the activation system. Took me 20 minutes.

LOL and re LOL. 9 month to develop this crap and 20 minutes to crack it -> LOL

Da Cryptum

[ChronoCross]

the example of music is fleeting. There are many products of music, there is only one coreavc. once you've pirated it there is nothing left to buy and the odds that you will buy it when you've already got it for free is pretty much 0.

How many businesses need coreavc? The amount of money they would make based on businesses is likely way less than other software which has a practical business purpose. Therefore they rely more on personal purchases than volume licensing. More Piracy from individuals means a significantly lower profit margin than the average software company.

[Sirber]

Why share with BetaBoy and not with the rest of us? :devil:I did for personal challenge, and I will not pirate and share something I bought.

Maybe this way I can show CoreCodec everything gets cracked and it's bad to put more restrictions on the paying customer.

[bob0r]

http://x264.nl/duke_activation.gif

[clsid]

the example of music is fleeting. There are many products of music, there is only one coreavc. once you've pirated it there is nothing left to buy and the odds that you will buy it when you've already got it for free is pretty much 0.
You are wrong. There is a benefit in going from a cracked to a bought version. Indeed, the software stays exactly the same. But the fact that it is pirated or legal changes. There are lots of people who use a pirated piece of software for a while and then decide to buy it because they like it very much and want to support the developers. You are obviously not such a person. Neither am I. But I do know plenty of people who do act in such a manner.

[ChronoCross]

IT's not even that. It's just such a random occurrence that someone does what you say. by basing a buisness model on it you would be taking a big risk. With an uncertain payout an inability to protect your own product from theives would make you look worse to possible investors

That's why MS has activation. Invester confidence that the product is protected and breaches are limited.

[3ngel]

Ahahahah i can't stop laugh! :D

More Piracy from individuals means a significantly lower profit margin than the average software company.

You know what this means?
That if users that bought this product are only those on this forum, they'll soon will go to bankrupt 'cause of their DRM policy :D

[G_M_C]

I;m just saying statistics show how much companies lose to piracy with serials. At least core is trying. Those other things do the same thing and yet no one stops buying the product. Microsoft products are giant pieces of DRM but has that stopped anyone? no.
[...]

You seem to have a tendancy to NOT read what others write. MS get away with this because their protection method does allow some freedom. It isn't very often you'll have to call MS to re-activate you OS. And when you call them, it is fixed in minutes. Thats called customer support.

Maybe you'll see the difference. There is allmost no freedom in the CPS (CC protection system / DRM), there is very bad customer support, and it MIGHT be fixed in a couple of days. And .... all that sh*t for a piece of software that doesnt even come close to the sophistication of an Operating System.

The arrogance of comparing a codec to an OS .... :o

[ChronoCross]

mm yea learn about the word arrogance. look it up in a dictionary. you guys bitching like this is the end of the world is what makes the comparison to an OS appropriate. The freedom that MS allows is a result in the fact that bill gates has 60 billion dollars. He can take a small hit for piracy.

You people keep comparing CC to some company that has 1000s of employees to handle customer support. The freedom you people want to have is what makes activation and or protection of IP useless and what causes so many smaller companies to go under. The "I bought it I should be able to use it everywhere I want" doesn't make sense.

Have you ever called MS? Apparently not.

@3ngel
What you wrote in comparison to what I said once again doesn't make sense.

[Cryptum]

The piracy has given to him 60 billion !! That is a fact ! :)

Da Cryptum

[Sirber]

They helped it.

Around 1995 all M$ product had a bypass key like 123-1234567 :D

[clsid]

IT's not even that. It's just such a random occurrence that someone does what you say. by basing a buisness model on it you would be taking a big risk. With an uncertain payout an inability to protect your own product from theives would make you look worse to possible investors
1) Perhaps you should learn English as well. However you seem to be an expert on arrogance. So skip that part of the dictionary.
2) By your argumentation CoreAVC v1.1 and below would have barely been sold. Afaik those sold pretty well, so your argumentation is false.

You people keep comparing CC to some company that has 1000s of employees to handle customer support.
CoreCodec doesn't have millions of customers. A small company should be able to give decent support as well.

[Sirber]

A small company should be able to give decent support as well.Detritus Software is failing miserably on that ;)

[bond]

strikes for rule 4 for 3ngel and ChronoCross. lets get back to a nice language please

[ChronoCross]

Guess how many employees they have.....I'll be you, your wrong with the guess.

My argument cannot be tested without taking approximate statistics. It's based on piracy which is an unknown variable. No one knows how many copies of it are out there. That doesn't make my arguments false it just makes it unprovable in a logistics sense.

I'm sure if we had the appropriate stats coreavc 1.1 would have made alot more money without piracy or at least some sort of protection.

[clsid]

Detritus Software is failing miserably on that ;)
LOL. You are forgiven since your prices are so low :)

[tomos]

wasn't talking to you. you gave a good answer. the other guy did not.

Even though the key thing is flawed and overused and sends data to their servers anyway (compares to a list of fake/comprmised keys)

if you mean me? i dont have to give an answer. i can only speak as a consumer not for the business side.

if you can speak for both, then good for you but i wont/cant.

i only care about the consumer side. i dont have to give any answers as to what companies should do to protect their IP. it's simply not my problem. as others have said, activation is a PITA and using a pirated one is not. simple.

[ChronoCross]

if you mean me? i dont have to give an answer. i can only speak as a consumer not for the business side.

if you can speak for both, then good for you but i wont/cant.

i only care about the consumer side. i dont have to give any answers as to what companies should do to protect their IP. it's simply not my problem. as others have said, activation is a PITA and using a pirated one is not. simple.

wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the guy directly above that post mr. 3ngel

lol

[Sirber]

LOL. You are forgiven since your prices are so low :)Even for free people don't want it :(

Cmon pirates! Pirate it! ;)

sorry for the OT

[clsid]

Guess how many employees they have.....I'll be you, your wrong with the guess.

My argument cannot be tested without taking approximate statistics. It's based on piracy which is an unknown variable. No one knows how many copies of it are out there. That doesn't make my arguments false it just makes it unprovable in a logistics sense.

I'm sure if we had the appropriate stats coreavc 1.1 would have made alot more money without piracy or at least some sort of protection.
Why should I care about how many employees they have? Probably just a handful. If they are not up to the task, then they so hire more staff or concentrate on just one product at a time.

Without stats I can indeed not falsify your arguments, but neither can you falsify mine when I claim that the opposite holds.

This discussion is going nowhere. Time for the thread to go back on topic.

[Revgen]

I'm glad I bought this software early when it came out. I'm not having any of the problems that newer purchasers are having.

[foxyshadis]

Please ask Microsoft the same question and see if you get the same response as CoreCodec (if they reply), as that's basically what they did with SP2, introducing Genuine Advantage. I don't remember this fuss with Adobe introducing activation (which I totally agree with Chronocross ISN'T DRM!!!! Properly research DRM and you'll be proved right!) in their products, so why the fuss for a codec that costs at most $20 and plays back H.264 faster than any publically available solution? Activation is designed to tie a product to a system. You don't complain when Microsoft or Adobe or another company does it, but CoreCodec and all the barrels start pointing!!!!!


Did you read the EULA all the way through it, or just click "I accept" and rush through like most people? IT PAYS TO READ THESE THINGS ALL THE WAY THROUGH AS THEY CONTAIN ALL THE LICENSE INFORMATION YOU NEED!!!!!

@3ngel: :goodpost: re prank / backlash.

If you think Microsoft, Adobe, Intuit, AutoCad, and any other company that has used activation hasn't had both a huge amount of backlash, and a huge amount of reported problems with their activation systems, you're sorely mistaken. Gripe sites are basically awash with reports. Intuit is the sneakiest, willfully deactivating perfectly good older products, Microsoft just plain doesn't care and demands a new license, Adobe is reasonably fair but prone to long stretches of activation problems.

Most companies that have used activaion have found that they simply don't have the server or support resources to handle it all, and mostly engender a lot of bad will from customers. (The big ones don't have to care, given the amount of bad will against them already.)

A quick check shows Coreavc 1.2 hasn't shown up on the major pirate sites yet, so in that sense they're not doing too badly. On the other hand, the entire exercise is dependant on more pirates buying legal than losses from folks who want nothing to do with activation, "horror stories", and terrible support, even if it would have worked fine for them. With all the griping spreading around, I know more than a few people were put off buying 1.1 after the 1.0 mess, and it'll be worse now. But more power to them, it's their company.

CC, why exactly are you berating someone for not opening a trouble ticket for the company, when that's exactly what they did, even if it was lost? (Before getting upset enough to cancel their order entirely.)

[akupenguin]

The Open Source Generation is really sad. Most of you think that everything should be free. I'm sure most of you dont realize that the reason xvid cannot sell their codec or even create official builds is because of patents. It's the same reason there are no official x264 builds.
No, the reason there are no official x264 builds is that I don't run windows and I don't want to bother figuring out how to cross-compile.

I don't believe in software patents, so I don't really care whether or not it's legal to distribute binaries. But even if I did take patents into account (and put aside the fact that mpeg-la allows a royalty-free licence for some number of codec instances and I have no idea whether x264 has passed that limit), I haven't seen any evidence that distributing sourcecode is any more legal than distributing binaries. The only thing source code gets you is perhaps a little weight to an argument that it was for "academic purposes"... which doesn't by itself let you violate patents, it only reduces the chance that you'll get sued.

[ChronoCross]

No, the reason there are no official x264 builds is that I don't run windows and I don't want to bother figuring out how to cross-compile.

I don't believe in software patents, so I don't really care whether or not it's legal to distribute binaries. But even if I did take patents into account (and put aside the fact that mpeg-la allows a royalty-free licence for some number of codec instances and I have no idea whether x264 has passed that limit), I haven't seen any evidence that distributing sourcecode is any more legal than distributing binaries. The only thing source code gets you is perhaps a little weight to an argument that it was for "academic purposes"... which doesn't by itself let you violate patents, it only reduces the chance that you'll get sued.

That's the discussion I was referring to. It's on too shady ground . The discussion happened back in like early 2005 last time I remember.

[Sirber]

Alright guys, let's stop this.

Keep 1.1 if you don't like activation or use 1.2.
or use something else

[Sharktooth]

Just my 2 cents...
Every piece of code that enforces the limitations specified into the software (or other stuff) license IS DRM.
However, before buying CoreAVC, i'll wait for a DRM-free (or if you preferer, an activation free) version capable of decoding lossless h.264.

[Chainmax]

If CoreAVC was available for portable devices and game consoles I would buy it in a heartbeat.

[DeepBeepMeep]

Beside the DRM we should not forget the real issues here:

- vapoware for bug fixes : although betaboy explicitely stated in this forum in many occasions that some issues would be fixed, it isn't the case. There are two ways to see it, either it is pure lies parts of a sales pitch or it is incompetence in not trying to understand the bug. I think it is both, regarding the "incompetence" theory I am a bit surprised that beta boy instead of asking more information about how to reproduce the bug, has just answered bug reports with his trademark "yes everything will be beautiful and fixed in the next release"

- vaporware for features: of course we have got here the all famous GPU Support. If you guys at Core have knew that you can't include it, then stop creating expections with make repeating announcements it is going to be there. Otherwise don't be surprised you have to handle disapointments. In additon if I remember correctly CoreAAC 2.0 and some other products were supposed to be part of the package as well

- long delays: ok it takes time for a small company to deliver products, but you won't convince me that that the release that was due already a couple months ago (betaboy made a couple a annoucements) has been delayed because of the time spent fixing bugs. It is quite obvious they have spent a big part of their time working on some other projects and on adding their beloved activation. Anyway, if you can't make it for a specific date stop announcing every week that the release is imminent. If you know you guys you are not capable to meet deadlines (it shoud be obvious after a certain time) don't make it worse and stop giving targeted dates !

- Disappearing features: it is quite likely that very few people in the near future will have a quad core CPU or even will ever need a quad cores to play video since most video are playable now with a monocore CPU. However, people don't like the feeling that they are beeing screwed up. Take away something even if they don't need it and don't be surprised this creates rage.

- Flawed DRM: I am not going to enter in the DRM discussion. However, let's assume I am not against it. At least I would like to know it is there, I would like to know what it does, which information are sent, how many activations I have. I can't understand how you could have believed that people would let get you away with you first version of the DRM that didn't mention anything about its existence. It should have crossed your mind with the success of all these tools to detect spyware that people are getting more concerned about what is installed on their computers.

- Rushed website: At firt you new web site didn't seem to have been tested much. Ok, it is impossible to check every details of it, but at least make sure that what people will see first will work properly. For instance it is quite strange you didn't realise that home page offered the possibility to any user to edit tags. More annoying the registration process which looked as if it hadn't been tested at all: once you are registed nothing tells you have been registered and that you need to login. If you don't want to spend days answering support mails at least make sure you products don't need support by fixing obvious bugs.

- Absence of communication: people in this forum have asked you questions about various things. Not answering questions about for instance how the DRM works is not going to reassure anybody it is not evil because it will open the doors to all sorts of theories.


The problem here is the that core tries a little too much to behave like Microsoft, develop tons of products at the same time, protect them with very unfriendly protections, ignore the customer. The truth here is that core is very very far from having the importance and hegemony of such a company. Core should use the tricks that helped small companies with little funds to develop : create a HAPPY community around a product, and make sure people say positive things about them and relies on word of mouth marketing... I have made some suggestions about this in my previous post...

In addition, You could consider doing a mea culpa as well it would be a good PR move, people can forgive as well...All of this is getting more and more urgent since what made Coreavc better (the speed) is soon likely to not be such a selling point with the recent big progresses made by open source solutions such as ffdshow.

[clsid]

:goodpost:

GPU support is still listed under the features (with 'to be added' note). BetaBoy still hasn't moved that to a roadmap where it belongs.

[Inventive Software]

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/2049/coreavclj0.png

@CoreCodec: Proper suggestion here. May I suggest different wording on the activation box, maybe assuring the user what you'll collect, or a link to the page that states what you'll collect, so the user isn't worrying what device information they'll collect. Explicitly stating it is just device information and (key point) no personal information is collected may also be on the cards too.

[Sirber]

I made my own installer, no activation.

http://i10.tinypic.com/4c7v520.png

http://i10.tinypic.com/2m34iuf.png

http://i7.tinypic.com/4d5zs0h.png

http://i15.tinypic.com/2pz03n6.png

http://i10.tinypic.com/2mwf6uh.png

http://i15.tinypic.com/48gdt8j.png

http://i7.tinypic.com/47xmejc.png

http://i7.tinypic.com/2w3vuo2.png

:D

[bob0r]

@Sirber

Register under another nick, and tell us how to do it (as i dont know already :p), something like NotSirber and join the FairUse party! :D

[Inventive Software]

He won't. ;) It's already activated, which is why it works without issues. ;)

EDIT: Can somebody either PM me or post here the license for CoreAVC so I can study it more closely please?

[Sirber]

He won't. ;)True :)

It's already activated, which is why it works without issues. ;)You need at least one installed and activated decoder to make everything I made. My installer doesn't call home and everything is clean and will work on a fresh install, where ever it is.

EDIT: Can somebody either PM me or post here the license for CoreAVC so I can study it more closely please?Buy it, then you'll have it :)

[Episode]

@Inventive Software, are you suspecting that their license is not legal? Are you a lawyer?-)

[Sirber]

Here it is:

CORECODEC, INC. END-USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

YOU SHOULD CAREFULLY READ THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND CONDITIONS
BEFORE USING THIS PRODUCT. IT CONTAINS SOFTWARE, THE USE OF
WHICH IS LICENSED BY CORECODEC, INC. TO ITS CUSTOMERS FOR
THEIR USE ONLY AS SET FORTH BELOW. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO
THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT, DO NOT USE THE
SOFTWARE. USING ANY PART OF THE SOFTWARE INDICATES THAT YOU
ACCEPT THESE TERMS.

GRANT OF LICENSE: CORECODEC, Inc. (the "Licensor") grants to you
this personal, limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
non-assignable license solely to use in a single copy of the
Licensed Works on a single computer for use by a single
concurrent user only, and solely provided that you adhere to
all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The
foregoing is an express limited use license and not an
assignment, sale, or other transfer of the Licensed Works or
any Intellectual Property Rights of Licensor.

ASSENT: By opening the file package containing this software,
you agree that this Agreement is a legally binding and valid
contract, agree to abide by the intellectual property laws
and all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and
further agree to take all necessary steps to ensure that the
terms and conditions of this Agreement are not violated by
any person or entity under your control or in your service.

OWNERSHIP OF SOFTWARE: The Licensor and/or its affiliates or
subsidiaries own certain rights that may exist from time to
time in this or any other jurisdiction, whether foreign or
domestic, under patent law, copyright law, publicity rights
law, moral rights law, trade secret law, trademark law,
unfair competition law or other similar protections,
regardless of whether or not such rights or protections are
registered or perfected (the "Intellectual Property Rights"),
in the computer software and hardware, together with any
related documentation (including design, systems and user)
and other materials for use in connection with such computer
software in this package (collectively, the "Licensed Works").
ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN AND TO THE LICENSED WORKS
ARE AND SHALL REMAIN IN LICENSOR.

RESTRICTIONS:

(I) You are expressly prohibited from copying, modifying,
merging, selling, leasing, redistributing, assigning, or
transferring in any matter, Licensed Works or any portion
thereof.

(II) You may take a single copy of materials within the
package or otherwise related to Licensed Works only as
required for backup purposes.

(III) You are also expressly prohibited from reverse
engineering, decompiling, translating, disassembling,
deciphering, decrypting, or otherwise attempting to discover
the source code of the Licensed Works as the Licensed Works
contain proprietary material of Licensor. You may not
otherwise modify, alter, adapt, port, or merge the Licensed
Works.

(IV) You may not remove, alter, deface, overprint or
otherwise obscure Licensor patent, trademark, service mark
or copyright notices.

(V) You agree that the Licensed Works will not be shipped,
transferred or exported into any other country, or used in
any manner prohibited by any government agency or any export
laws, restrictions or regulations.

(VI) You may not publish or distribute in any form of
electronic or printed communication the materials within or
otherwise related to Licensed Works, including but not
limited to the object code, documentation, help files,
examples, and benchmarks.

TERM: This Agreement is effective until terminated. You may
terminate this Agreement at any time by uninstalling the
Licensed Works and destroying all copies of the Licensed
Works. Upon any termination, you agree to uninstall the
Licensed Works and return or destroy all copies of the
Licensed Works, any accompanying documentation, and all other
associated materials.

GOVERNING LAW: This License Agreement shall be governed by
the laws of the State of New Jersey and by the laws of the
United States, excluding their conflicts of law principles.

WARRANTIES AND DISCLAIMER:

EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED OTHERWISE IN A WRITTEN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN LICENSOR AND YOU, THE LICENSED WORKS ARE NOW PROVIDED
WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THE
WARRANTY OF NON-INFRINGEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING,
LICENSOR MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT:

(I) THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS,
(II) THE USE OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED,
TIMELY, SECURE, OR ERROR FREE.
(III) THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE
LICENSED WORKS WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE.
(IV) THE QUALITY OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR
EXPECTATIONS.
(V) ANY ERRORS IN THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE CORRECTED
(VI) YOU MAY USE, PRACTICE, EXECUTE, OR ACCESS THE LICENSED
WORKS WITHOUT VIOLATING THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
OF OTHERS.

SOME STATES OR JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR LIMITATIONS ON HOW LONG AN IMPLIED
WARRANTY MAY LAST, SO THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY
TO YOU. IF TEXAS LAW IS NOT HELD TO APPLY TO THIS AGREEMENT
FOR ANY REASON, THEN IN JURISDICTIONS WHERE WARRANTIES,
GUARANTEES, REPRESENTATIONS, AND/OR CONDITIONS OF ANY TYPE MAY
NOT BE DISCLAIMED, ANY SUCH WARRANTY, GUARANTEE, REPRESENATION
AND/OR WARRANTY IS: (1) HEREBY LIMITED TO THE PERIOD OF EITHER
(A) THIRTY (30) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF OPENING THE PACKAGE
CONTAINING THE LICENSED WORKS OR (B) THE SHORTEST PERIOD
ALLOWEDBY LAW IN THE APPLICABLE JURISDICTION IF A THIRTY (30)
DAY LIMITATION WOULD BE UNENFORCEABLE; AND (2) SOLE LIABILITY
FOR ANY BREACH OF ANY SUCH WARRANTY, GUARANTEE, REPRESENTATION,
AND/OR CONDITION SHALL BE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A NEW COPY OF THE
LICENSED WORKS.

IN NO EVENT SHALL LICENSOR OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO YOU OR
ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER,
INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE,
DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER OR NOT LICENSOR HAD BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OF THE LICENSED
WORKS. SOME JURISDICTIONS PROHIBIT THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION
OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, SO THE
ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. THESE LIMITATIONS SHALL
APPLY NOT WITHSTANDING ANY FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY
LIMITED REMEDY.

SEVERABILITY: In the event any provision of this License
Agreement is found to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the
validity, legality and enforceability of any of the remaining
provisions shall not in any way be affected or impaired and a
valid, legal and enforceable provision of similar intent and
economic impact shall be substituted therefor.

ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This License Agreement sets forth the entire
understanding and agreement between you and CoreCodec, Inc. and
supersedes all prior agreements, whether written or oral, with
respect to the Software, and may be amended only in writing
signed by both parties.

CORECODEC, INC.
307 Sinclair Ave.
Lanoka Harbor, New Jersey, 08734
support@corecodec.com

Updated March 22, 2006

I don't think it's illegal to post it.

[Sirber]

(II) You may take a single copy of materials within the
package or otherwise related to Licensed Works only as
required for backup purposes.
nice! I can backup :D
(III) You are also expressly prohibited from reverse
engineering, decompiling, translating, disassembling,
deciphering, decrypting, or otherwise attempting to discover
the source code of the Licensed Works as the Licensed Works
contain proprietary material of Licensor. You may not
otherwise modify, alter, adapt, port, or merge the Licensed
Works.
But I need to do that to backup... :(

[Inventive Software]

(II) You may take a single copy of materials within the
package or otherwise related to Licensed Works only as
required for backup purposes.
nice! I can backup :D
But they've yet to update the license it seems, to accomodate for the "official" installer phoning home:
Updated March 22, 2006
We're in November, almost December. :D
(III) You are also expressly prohibited from reverse
engineering, decompiling, translating, disassembling,
deciphering, decrypting, or otherwise attempting to discover
the source code of the Licensed Works as the Licensed Works
contain proprietary material of Licensor. You may not
otherwise modify, alter, adapt, port, or merge the Licensed
Works.
But I need to do that to backup... :(
It doesn't prevent you. You've already proved that! :D;)

EDIT: After careful digging (2nd paragraph, not exactly far :D), those who have bitched and complained about the activation need only look here:
GRANT OF LICENSE: CORECODEC, Inc. (the "Licensor") grants to you
this personal, limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
non-assignable license solely to use in a single copy of the
Licensed Works on a single computer for use by a single
concurrent user only, and solely provided that you adhere to
all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The
foregoing is an express limited use license and not an
assignment, sale, or other transfer of the Licensed Works or
any Intellectual Property Rights of Licensor.

Key words being non-transferable, single copy, single computer, single concurrent user. Don't argue, it was there all along. ;)
EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PROVIDED OTHERWISE IN A WRITTEN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN LICENSOR AND YOU, THE LICENSED WORKS ARE NOW PROVIDED
WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THE
WARRANTY OF NON-INFRINGEMENT. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING,
LICENSOR MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT:

(I) THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS,
(II) THE USE OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED,
TIMELY, SECURE, OR ERROR FREE.
(III) THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE
LICENSED WORKS WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE.
(IV) THE QUALITY OF THE LICENSED WORKS WILL MEET YOUR
EXPECTATIONS.
(V) ANY ERRORS IN THE LICENSED WORKS WILL BE CORRECTED
(VI) YOU MAY USE, PRACTICE, EXECUTE, OR ACCESS THE LICENSED
WORKS WITHOUT VIOLATING THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
OF OTHERS.
In effect, according to this license, you agreed that they don't have any obligation to fix issues with the product, activation and bugs included, because they have stated that they make no warranty they will. Basically, CoreCodec are doing their darndest to fix issues they don't have to. Again, don't argue, it was there all along. ;)

[Sirber]

license also say I cannot post benchmarks...

seems they used a microsoft licence :D

[clsid]

Depending on where you live, reverse engineering is legal, no matter what the license says. The average license if full of shit anyways.

[Disabled]

Depending on where you live, reverse engineering is legal, no matter what the license says. The average license if full of shit anyways.

Do I get this licence presented prior to buying the software? I searched their site and didn't find it and did not want to buy a second licence just to see if I can read that licence before I actually buy it. If I'm not able to read the licence before I buy it, I don't have to read that licence, as it has no meaning over here in germany! (The software is still protected by the usual general german laws, but thats it).
Therefore I'm for example allowed to sell my CoreAVC licence to others here in Germany (And delete my own copy of course).

[Sirber]

it's in the installer, after authentification.

[ChronoCross]

I really wish I had access to the license when I was arguing yesterday.

[Inventive Software]

Hold on, the installer phone's home BEFORE it gives you the license???? That's a crazy way of doing it. The license should at least give the end user the chance to decline or accept BEFORE it tries to activate. Why not just activate it after all the options have been given, a la NSIS for example, and when the user clicks "Install", that's the time to activate......

Does that sound a little disjointed? It does when I read it.....

EDIT: It is customary for companies to put the license agreements for their products on their website, I believe Microsoft does for example.

[Sirber]

Why showing the license when it's an illegal copy?
Activate or die trying! mouhahahahaha ;)

@ChronoCross

Are you arguing on something you don't even have? good work

[Sirber]

http://www.usertrust.com/

Seems the decoder (.ax) is signed by that

[Sirber]

installer don't work on another system. Decoder don't register.
The serial # returned by the server is tied too to 1 system.

My first attempt only bypassed the activation, but I didn't get a serial so the decoder should not work.
My second attempt made it work only on my system whitout calling home.
Looking at the .AX, I'm sure the file is digitaly signed so if I try ti dig in and hack, it will not work.

Now I understand why 9 months for that small changelog :D

Well, I'm out of the case and won't use CoreCodec products in the futur.

[ChronoCross]

No I was arguing on what I already read but I didn't have a copy of it where I was yesterday.

The idea of phoning home before showing the license could be construed as verifying that you have a right to even view the license. Although it might work better the other way around for some people. Although it is clear that no one read the license other than me Sirber and Inventive software (btw how come none of you have firewalls that tell you when new programs try to connect to the internet?).

@clsid
You are right about the reverse engineering. They key is that it's illegal to then sell what you have reverse engineered.

[Sirber]

btw how come none of you have firewalls that tell you when new programs try to connect to the internet?NSIS is maybe using IE for that.

[GmorG McRoth]

Maybe core did not wanted to sell codec in first place, just the activation system, and this is just a test drive to see how it works. When they work out bugs they will start selling CoreActivationSystem to the corporations. :)
/joking

[Sirber]

Maybe core did not wanted to sell codec in first place, just the activation system, and this is just a test drive to see how it works. When they work out bugs they will start selling CoreActivationSystem to the corporations. :)
/joking

Core Activation Secure System

Or in short... ;)

[BetaBoy]

All... As we had it with CoreAVC 1.0 the EULA has now been removed from the next installer... as I stated about 40 pages back... Copyright laws are sufficient. See: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=838162&highlight=eula#post838162

In our honest opinion (and our counsels) EULA's are useless.

[Sirber]

Does that mean that the activation will be removed too? Copyright laws are sufficient...

[Inventive Software]

Or maybe they could charge a little more, say $15 for the standard codec, and $30 for the pro perhaps, to compensate for the people that move it regularly.

[3ngel]

At this point one would ask what they do care if someone move it 100 times a day ;)
But in the extreme ridiculous case, if this could stop all the insanity, a higher price could be good.

[pankov]

Betaboy,
please, look at your ICQ and/or e-mail and/or PMs.
I'm (and gabrielaDI too) trying to contact you for more than a week now without success
:(

[oddball]

I have had no reply to my last PM to him either. I have had no reply to my last raised ticked asking for a refund nor my PayPal raised dispute.

Maybe they are swamped or maybe they are playing for time. I have no idea.

But what can you do?

[ChronoCross]

maybe it's a holiday weekend and they decided not to work 24 hours a day.....either way patience is a virtue.

[BetaBoy]

I'm here... yeah vacation for me is packing... i'm moving to where its warmer... pankov... i'll look at the PM's in the AM... oddball.. I did not pursue your issue as you indicated you had requested a refund.

[Ginsonic]

Betaboy, Please don't forget about my update notification, I am patiently waiting for many days now. You have an unread PM from me too !

[Oxygen]

What you dont understand is that the license is for the installed OS. Not the PC as you are indicating. This is not something we are defining but the IP holders who we licensing the technology from. This is nothing we can control.


As stated in the CC forum.
And as stated way earlier in this thread too.

Some of the decisions made by CC are not on their own will. Free upgrade is not free on the IP licence. Why can't people understand that ?

IF you want to blame someone, go blame the MPEG.LA or the other licence holders.

And when will people understand that software warrenty and *right* for the upgrade is a myth ?!
You can hope for it, but you can not oblige the seller to do it.

Quick reminder: you want to make something that acts with MPEG4 AVC, sell your product as you need to eat at the end of the month and stay legal, you _need_ to get a licence for it. Point and simple.
This is the _same_ for MP3, and many others technologies.

And last but not least, if you guys were stopping fracking bash about thoses things, maybe cc would have more time to work on your issues rather than having to deal with you stupid trolls.

[Sirber]

I read before that there are no fees bellow 100 000 copies of the decoder...

[clsid]

And upgrades are free.

And when will people understand that software warrenty and *right* for the upgrade is a myth ?!It becomes a right when a company sells something with a note attached to it saying "feature X will be added at a later date".

[Episode]

This one is from MPEG LA (http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html)

Royalties to be paid by end product manufacturers for an encoder, a decoder or both (“unit”) begin at US $0.20 per unit after the first 100,000 units each year. There are no royalties on the first 100,000 units each year. Above 5 million units per year, the royalty is US $0.10 per unit.

[bob0r]

Means we got pwned! :thanks:

[Oxygen]

This one is from MPEG LA (http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html)

Following is a brief summary of the licensing terms, which are yet to be incorporated into definitive license agreements and therefore, provided for information purposes only. These terms cover the entire AVC Standard regardless of which Profile(s) are used:

Hence, as you and i don't know what licence CC have, you can't refer to a brief summary of the licensing terms :cool:

The quote you are refering to only mention the royalties PER codec, not the surrounding costs

Licence *entry ticket* for example ...

[Oxygen]

And upgrades are free.

It becomes a right when a company sells something with a note attached to it saying "feature X will be added at a later date".

Good luck with enforcing that.

Either you read that as :
i've the right to get the upgrade at a later time
OR
it's not on this version, you need to wait for the future version to get it, upgrade will be on your charge

Again, don't take me wrong, i don't necessarly agree with the activation (well, i don't agree with it at all), but people should stop mis-interpreting what they read.

[clsid]

It is normal in the software world that minor and micro updates are free. Major updates (v1 -> v2) are usually not free.

BTW, CoreCodec's official statement is that all 1.x updates are free for existing customers. So STFU.

[ChronoCross]

It is normal in the software world that minor and micro updates are free. Major updates (v1 -> v2) are usually not free.

BTW, CoreCodec's official statement is that all 1.x updates are free for existing customers. So STFU.

You still overlooked the fact that it's not free for them. Oxygen is definitely correct in that we do not know the true licensing terms they have with mpegla. Quoting a public document is generally not evidence as to the true costs.

"Features will be added at a later date" cannot possibly be taken as "updates are free". Not to mention that GPU support wasn't mentioned for the 1.0 version on the site simply that it will exist in Professional Edition at some point. Misleading (yes) Illegal (No).

[clsid]

The licensing terms are as given in that document unless you prove me otherwise. Period.

Again, BetaBoy himself has said that all v1.x updates will be free, including the update that contains the promised GPU acceleration support. Period.

[bob0r]

1.x + gpu free
2.x + gpu + more than 2 cores + ... + ... = pay

At least thats what i would do :devil:

[Oxygen]

The licensing terms are as given in that document unless you prove me otherwise. Period.

Again, BetaBoy himself has said that all v1.x updates will be free, including the update that contains the promised GPU acceleration support. Period.

It's no document. It's a PR.
And i've nothing to prove to you. Period.

Anyway, please STFU yourself:

1 The licensing terms summarized below are for informational purposes only. They are not an offer to license and may
not be relied upon for any purpose. The AVC Patent Portfolio License provides the actual terms of license on which
users may rely.
as stated in the first page here: http://www.mpegla.com/avc/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf

BB stated way earlier (late may i think) that there would be one day an activation to provide the free updates. Period.

[Oxygen]

It is normal in the software world that minor and micro updates are free. Major updates (v1 -> v2) are usually not free.

BTW, CoreCodec's official statement is that all 1.x updates are free for existing customers. So STFU.

thanks for playing, please come back another time.

[clsid]

That Press Release contains the same numbers as the 'Summary of license Terms'. I my eyes that info is pretty reliable. Better than any fairy tales you guys suck out of your thumbs.

[Episode]

@Oxygen, this one http://www.mpegla.com/avc/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf isn't just PR and it says exactly the same thing as my earlier link did.

Anyway, I still propose that bond should separate this discussion from this thread into it's own as it really doesn't have anything do to with the actual product anymore, just bashing each other with nonsense claims and insults. People who are really trying to get help with their activation process may not get help because all the attention is directed on those who are fighting (in a way that leads to nowhere, it's like little kids fighting with arguments like "it is!" "no it isn't" "but it is!" "go to hell!" "I'm gonna tell my mommy.." :).

Discussion about CoreCodecs activation system, lack of promised features and other such thing is good and necessary and CoreCodec can and should listen to their customers for what they want (remember, these are the guys that are paying your salary) , because that way they can bring us better product in next version. But when it turns into like this, it shouldn't included in a thread that's supposed to be somekind of helpdesk-thread for those that are having some issues with their product.

[Shinigami-Sama]

@Oxygen, this one http://www.mpegla.com/avc/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf isn't just PR and it says exactly the same thing as my earlier link did.

Anyway, I still propose that bond should separate this discussion from this thread into it's own as it really doesn't have anything do to with the actual product anymore, just bashing each other with nonsense claims and insults. People who are really trying to get help with their activation process may not get help because all the attention is directed on those who are fighting (in a way that leads to nowhere, it's like little kids fighting with arguments like "it is!" "no it isn't" "but it is!" "go to hell!" "I'm gonna tell my mommy.." :).

Discussion about CoreCodecs activation system, lack of promised features and other such thing is good and necessary and CoreCodec can and should listen to their customers for what they want (remember, these are the guys that are paying your salary) , because that way they can bring us better product in next version. But when it turns into like this, it shouldn't included in a thread that's supposed to be somekind of helpdesk-thread for those that are having some issues with their product.

here here

[Oxygen]

That Press Release contains the same numbers as the 'Summary of license Terms'. I my eyes that info is pretty reliable. Better than any fairy tales you guys suck out of your thumbs.

What part of that you don't understand ?


1 The licensing terms summarized below are for informational purposes only. They are not an offer to license and may
not be relied upon for any purpose. The AVC Patent Portfolio License provides the actual terms of license on which
users may rely.

[lazyn00b]

On the bright side, problems with CoreAVC decoder on MCE 2005 seem to be fixed with this 1.2 release! I played a few different clips encoded with x264 over and over for hours with WMP 11 on repeat, and there were no crashes.

Can any other MCE 2005 users confirm this improvement?

[clsid]

*sigh* nit-picker

That's just legal mumbo jumbo to cover their asses. Just a disclaimer.

But suppose that MPEG LA document is totally incorrect. Does it matter? No. The retail price of CoreAVC Pro is $14.95 including free updates for v1.x.x releases. Fact. The customer doesn't give a damn whether the license fees that CoreCodec has to pay are $0.20 per unit or $0 or $1,000. Betaboy says that updates count as additional units. I will assume that this is true. So what. CoreCodec has a roadmap and thus an estimate of the number of releases in the 1.x series. All the costs are included in the retail price (assuming they know how to run a business). This does mean is that CoreCodec probably won't be eager to release many extra tiny updates, e.g. to fix small bugs, since more updates could mean higher costs. So that could be an explanation why it took them so long to release a fix for the MCE bug.

On the other hand, CoreCodec can just lie about the number of units that they have shipped, simply claiming its below 100,000 units and pay no license fees at all :devil:

[Inventive Software]

@clsid: What if they do lie about the number of units they ship? I'd have thought the MPEG LA were quite hot on fake numbers of units shipped by companies... can anybody confirm or deny with firm evidence?

[bond]

can we please stop this discussion? you pay for what is in the coreavc version you buy, nothing more. period

if you want to spend your money on something because of what might happen in the future try stocks or go to the casino

[SeeMoreDigital]

Well said Bond...

I think this thread has gone long enough (119 pages).... How about starting a new CoreAVC 1.2 discussion thread. With a stern notice about ranting?


Cheers

[Inventive Software]

Right you horrible lot (not always, just recently ;)), rantings for CoreCodec / CoreAVC goes in this thread: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775

[oddball]

OK I *FINALLY* got 1.2 installed (I won't go into anything more on my feelings about this as you probably already know those).

Can anyone tell me if DirectShow deinterlacing is only applicable to VMR playback? I ask this because my system is not fast enough to playback a lot of HD H.264 content but I did notice that if I put it into DirectShow deinterlacing when in overlay mode the image flickers very badly and I get scanlines. Also when capturing frames in this mode the images come out upside down. If I playback in standard overlay mode it actually plays back upside down too!

Software deinterlacing does not exhibit any of these problems in overlay mode.

[Foreigner999]

Betaboy any updates on support for U3? Will it be available in the 1.x updates?
And what happened to the CoreAAC 2.0 update we were going to recieve?

[Seb.26]

OK I *FINALLY* got 1.2 installed (I won't go into anything more on my feelings about this as you probably already know those).

Can anyone tell me if DirectShow deinterlacing is only applicable to VMR playback? I ask this because my system is not fast enough to playback a lot of HD H.264 content but I did notice that if I put it into DirectShow deinterlacing when in overlay mode the image flickers very badly and I get scanlines. Also when capturing frames in this mode the images come out upside down. If I playback in standard overlay mode it actually plays back upside down too!

Software deinterlacing does not exhibit any of these problems in overlay mode.

have you try to use MPC pixel shaders deinterlacing ?
( maybe GPU can help ... )

[movmasty]

CoreCodec is proud to present CoreAVC our AVC/H.264 decoder that had originally been written to be a plugin for CorePlayer ( see: www.coreplayer.com ) but because of early testing we found that it was the most 'processor effecient' H.264 decoder available and decided to port it to the directshow framework. We are now adding it to our CoreCodec Suite of directshow codecs and are making it our flagship codec for Consumers and third party licensees.

Purchase/Download it here: http://www.coreavc.com
Escuse me BB, shouldnt a simple decoder to be free?

how do you think that people will buy your h264 encoder if is quite hard to simply watch those movies?

like example realvideo always gives its decoder for free, and micro$oft as well.

[Seb.26]

Escuse me BB, shouldnt a simple decoder to be free?
how do you think that people will buy your h264 encoder if is quite hard to simply watch those movies?
like example realvideo always gives its decoder for free, and micro$oft as well.
CoreCodec don't sell video ... they sell software ... :confused:

[_xxl]

http://i14.tinypic.com/3yhzsw7.jpg
Is this legal?
CoreAVC 1.1.0.5?

[soresu]

This business with activation in 1.2 is ridiculous... It barely has enough features to warrant a .1 update and the most wanted thing in it is the Windows MCE fix.

I just changed out my motherboard (useless Abit KN9 SLi from early production) and reinstalled, only to realise that I was back to using version 1.1 because I couldn't install 1.2 anymore. This is exactly the kind of stance that makes MS a target for crackers with Vista... only they at least amended their license so that you could reinstall/change hardware as often as you like...

I'm not a happy customer! :mad:

OK... i'm cooling down now... rant over

[Sharktooth]

@soresu: for rants please use this thread: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775

[movmasty]

CoreCodec don't sell video ... they sell software ... :confused:

Neither realvideo nor micro$oft do.....:rolleyes:

[Romario]

http://i14.tinypic.com/3yhzsw7.jpg
Is this legal?
CoreAVC 1.1.0.5?

Yes it is, as far I know.

[_xxl]

Yes it is, as far I know.
Is CoreAVC 1.1.0.5 free?

[ChronoCross]

Yes it is, as far I know.

No it's not legal. That codec pack is breaking the law. that is a PAID codec being given away for FREE. Which is definitely illegal.

[SeeMoreDigital]

No it's not legal. That codec pack is breaking the law. that is a PAID codec being given away for FREE. Which is definitely illegal.I wonder how they've been able to make it work?

[cacepi]

I wonder how they've been able to make it work?
It's not the activation-required 1.2 codec, but an earlier one that's been cracked.

[Sirber]

1.1.0.5 is the last DRM-free release.

[Romario]

Who cares! 1.1.0.5 is an "old" version, so CoreCodec don't offer it anymore.

[KoD]

Ican also give the name of a player that is sold commercially and that bundles coreavc as well as some open source decoders like coreaac, gabest's mpeg2 decoder and others while being payware and closed source. And some people wonder why a small company that makes its money from selling a decoder and a player had to go the "let's implement activation" way...

[Sirber]

@KoD

What's the name?

[foxyshadis]

Free-codecs is full of illegal and shady codec packs, they've hosted ones that bundle nero, elecard, on2, divx pro (before it was free), and others over the years. So no big surprise there. More to the point, full of system-killer codec packs. (The worst part was that it was usually the commercial codecs that are the buggiest, ripping up your system's directshow capability, not the free ones.)

[KoD]

Well, there's someting called FantasyDVDPlayer... just don't involve me in any sorts of trouble....

[Sirber]

http://www.tucows.com/preview/402989

that's the one?

[KoD]

Yes, that's the one. Be careful if you plan on installing it... look in your Windows/system32 for a folder where it places all its bundled filters and make a backup of that folder. Upon uninstallation it deletes that folder but does not unregister the filters there, so you'll have to go back to your backup and unregister them manually. At least that's the painful memory I have of it. :( There's also the nice media files extensions hijack it does that's not reverted upon uninstall.

[pankov]

I'm here... yeah vacation for me is packing... i'm moving to where its warmer... pankov... i'll look at the PM's in the AM... oddball.. I did not pursue your issue as you indicated you had requested a refund.
Betaboy,
I still haven't received the e-mail with the updated version
:(
Should I contact you again? and how?

[Maiku]

pankov: i'm guessing you don't check CoreCodec's actual forums, which you probably should do

Paypal has been fixed and we have fixed almost everybody that we could. For those that didn't got their products, please send me the paypal receipt to corecodec.sales@gmail.com, and please add [PAYPAL] at the beginning of the subject.

People who bought an older version of CoreAVC but did not got the update, send me the paypal receipt and your CoreAccount (at http://portal.coreforge.org) login/name if you have one to corecodec.sales@gmail.com, and please add [UPDATE] at the beginning of the subject.

We will then take care of those unlucky people once possible.

Please do not forget to add [PAYPAL] or [UPDATE] !

Thank you.

[pankov]

Maiku,
10x for the info ... I'll try it and hope it will work this time
:)

[fedmond31]

does not work neither i am an early buyer of coeavc pro , i have mailed twice to betaboy and did maiku suggestion but i have not my mail with update.
quite upset now

[ChronoCross]

betaboy is currently moving so he doesn't have internet. Try emailing their support department.

[Ginsonic]

Try emailing their support department

I think he did

and did maiku suggestion

I also emailed support department as suggested but still no answer.

[Isochroma]

The true secret of CoreAVC is not its unusually efficient AVC decoding code - which will someday be equalled and perhaps even bested by ffdshow - but a little-noticed capability which has slipped quietly under the radar of most everyone but myself...

The story begins long ago in the misty veils of ancient times, but to make it shorter, I'll summarize its most important points. The VMR9 renderer, for sure, and probably also VMR7, both have a strange behaviour regarding YUV data presented to their input pins.

In particular, if any YUV format is presented, values outside the range of 16-235 (TV levels) are clamped; RGB inputs are not clamped. After uncountably extensive tests by yours truly using every filter combination imaginable, it has been determined that the clamping behaviour holds true for every case, and in no case is there an exception but one.

Avery Lee, the creator of VirtualDub, has been investigating the strange quirks of luma levels in the VMR renderers here (http://www.virtualdub.org/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=92).

You may be asking yourself right now, "why oh why would I want PC level range when most video is coded in TV range?". Some good reasons come to mind: your video output device is probably a PC monitor or LCD, which expects PC levels.

Feeding TV levels to such a device results in washed-out blacks (compounding the backlight leakage already present on LCDs) and dim whites.

During encoding or re-encoding, the AviSynth command:

ColorYUV(levels="TV->PC")

can be used to stretch the TV levels to fit your device, or alternately, ffdshow's 'levels' filter can do it in realtime. But if ffdshow is sending any YUV format to the renderer, this will be utterly useless due to clamping.

Knowing this, it is time to shift the focus of our examination to CoreAVC. This nice little filter has a checkbox labelled "Fix VMR9 color range". When checked, the output of VMR9 is observed to be full PC range, using a full-range source and with any YUV format selected as output (and no, it's not secretly sending RGB; the input pin of the VMR9 renderer was checked to make sure).

Never, ever in the history of VMR9 has any piece of software been able to make this impossible event occur. Somewhere in the VMR9 or elsewhere in the system, exists a method to force the VMR9 to pass full PC range without clamping, from a YUV input.

It is also observed, that if CoreAVC is set to output any YUV format, and ffdshow is set to accept that format and output any YUV format (no RGB formats checked), then the renderer will observe the usual clamping behavior. Thus, the CoreAVC filter must be directly connected to the VMR9 renderer's input pin in order for the fix to work.

The hope is now to find out how they did it. If the information can be obtained, developers of all other filters may also incorporate the fix into their software. The fix has many advantages; most importantly it means that ffdshow can output YV12 without the heavy CPU burden of conversion to RGB, yet still maintain PC range.

To wrap up, a request is now issued to CoreCodec to provide this small tidbit of information, which would both provide the video community with a much-needed fix, yet still maintain the advantage CoreAVC enjoys by means of its efficient decoding architecture.

Note: Verification

The behavior as stated above can be verified by running three instances of MPC. Your should have two source materials, one encoded in TV range, the other PC range, output in either VMR9 or VMR9 Renderless. Drivers newer than 84.21 on Nvidia cards may cause unpredictable results. Finally, make sure ffdshow is NOT set to accept any raw video inputs, to avoid having it get in between CoreAVC and the VMR9 renderer.

MPC #1: CoreAVC filter set to RGB32 output ("Fix VMR9 levels" checkbox state shouldn't matter)
MPC #2: CoreAVC filter set to any YUV ouput, checkbox checked (should cause unclamped passthrough)
MPC #3: CoreAVC filter set to any YUV output, checkbox unchecked (should cause clamping to TV range)

If your source is TV range, #1-3 should appear identical and show TV range
If your source is PC range, #1,2 should appear identical and show PC range, while #3 shows TV range.

[DeathWolf]

For those interested.
What i have found on this matter is that there's a fix for vmr to force output PC levels, at least with nvidia drivers.
This is it:

1 Launch regedit and determine the current primary display card by
looking in
HKey_Local_Machine\Hardware\DeviceMap\Video
and note the GUID (global unique identifier assigned by Windows),
which is the long string in brackets { } at the end of the entry
ʺ\device\video0ʺ.
2 Look in
HKey_Local_Machine\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Video\
{GUID}\0000
where {GUID} is the number derived from the previous step.
3 Open the ʺ0000ʺ directory and create a new DWORD called
VMRCCCSStatus and give it a value of
0x1 - to force use of the standard YUV range of 16-235
0x3 - to force use of the extended YUV range of 0-255

This seems to effectively(at least on my two comps) force TV levels to be remapped(stretched) to PC levels. Also i think it clamps if it receives full PC levels but i havent checked that thoroughly yet.

[Egh]

That fix works only with DVI outputs, and of course only with Nvidia cards, unfortunately.

No it fixed my case as well. I have 7600GS and use casual D-Sub output for CRT monitor. Since i work much with PC level videos (i.e. which are already encoded as (0..255)) i was very annoyed by VMR9+YV12 output.

Solution from DW helped the issue (and he told me a while ago before posted here on the forums :P)

[Isochroma]

84.21 may clips VMR9 outside 16-235 over DVI, Latest Nvidia driver clips (http://forum.inmatrix.com/index.php?showtopic=4387)

Quote from the 84.21 driver release notes:

"Video color-space range for DVI-only1 outputs is erroneously set to standard mode (16-235) instead of extended mode (0-255).

A new detection feature to apply Standard CSC mode to TV outputs (including NTSC, PAL, 480i, and 576i), included DVI-only outputs by mistake.

Note: The driver correctly applies extended mode to analog outputs, and standard mode to TV outputs (including NTSC, PAL, 480i, and 576i).

A future driver release will correct this and apply the extended-mode color space to DVI-only outputs."

1. “DVI-only” means only one display is connected, and it is to the DVI output.

[wiak]

This business with activation in 1.2 is ridiculous... It barely has enough features to warrant a .1 update and the most wanted thing in it is the Windows MCE fix.

I just changed out my motherboard (useless Abit KN9 SLi from early production) and reinstalled, only to realise that I was back to using version 1.1 because I couldn't install 1.2 anymore. This is exactly the kind of stance that makes MS a target for crackers with Vista... only they at least amended their license so that you could reinstall/change hardware as often as you like...

I'm not a happy customer! :mad:

OK... i'm cooling down now... rant over
got a point, why have activation?, when someone will everytime crack/hack it, just look at microsoft, People wants a codec that will work in there HTPC and there main PC, and will work with diffrent OS'es on the same pc

i have the problem to it says :
this product has already been activated
dooh, i just reinstalled windows?, what about it ask's the account system that it will allow to run on upto 4 pcs at a time and no more?, it will give people more room, and meybe people will not download a hacked/cracked versions :confused:

my little story/timeline (and am proud of it to!)
1. I downloaded the alpha codecs that was here in the forum
2: I got CoreAVC 1.1.0.5 of a friend (illegal)
3. I Bought CoreAVC 1.1.0.5 (Legal!)
4. I upgraded to 1.2.0.0(Legal!)
5. I have no clue but i cant use 1.2 as it says its already activated
6. I reverted to my friends one (illegal), but i payd for 1.1.0.5, but i cant download it anymore
7. Now i use 1.1.0.5 (illegal!)

i think many people has my dilemma :/

[Rectal Prolapse]

I haven't installed 1.2 yet - I have a dual-boot system (two OSes on the same PC) and I NEED to have CoreAVC Pro working on both (one OS for video editing and previewing, the other for HTPC-only use). From what I read this isn't possible.

Or is it? Has someone tried it?

[wiak]

I haven't installed 1.2 yet - I have a dual-boot system (two OSes on the same PC) and I NEED to have CoreAVC Pro working on both (one OS for video editing and previewing, the other for HTPC-only use). From what I read this isn't possible.

Or is it? Has someone tried it?
yes, i have tryd to run CoreAVC 1.2 on Windows XP & Windows Vista on the same pc in dualboot :scared:

[Rectal Prolapse]

Thanks for the reply! Did it work?

[wiak]

Thanks for the reply! Did it work?

not for me :scared:

[Rectal Prolapse]

That sucks. :(

If I ask for a new activation for the 2nd OS install, will it disable the 1st activation on the 1st OS? I hope not. It is physically on the same PC. I can even install it on the same hard drive on the same partition (satisfying the one copy only requirement). So why can't I use both, one at a time?

I hope this gets fixed...

[Inventive Software]

Careful you two. If you would like to rant at CoreCodec's so-called "activation", there's a ranting thread (almost) exclusively for it here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775). :D

The only solution I can see Rectal Prolapse is to buy 2 licenses. Either that, or use ffdshow for the editing if you can get away with it.

[Foreigner999]

Careful you two. If you would like to rant at CoreCodec's so-called "activation", there's a ranting thread (almost) exclusively for it here (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775). :D

The only solution I can see Rectal Prolapse is to buy 2 licenses. Either that, or use ffdshow for the editing if you can get away with it.

Sounds like a geniune issue than a rant of any kind.

Anyone know what happened with Coreaac 2.0 that was planned to be included?

[kamaleon]

Hi folks, how's it going, my first post here ever :D
Does corecodec work with 4:2:2? sorry but the search feature doesn't seem to gimme any results, might have to do with the :

I'm trying to know if it'd work on 4:2:2 satellite broadcasts.

[Manao]

I'm not aware of any 4:2:2 H264 encoders, except the reference software. So how would you get 4:2:2 H264/AVC satellite broadcasts ?

[kamaleon]

Hi manao, thanks for the answer. I didn't know that. Good to know now.

The reference software you mean's coreavc?

[KoD]

The reference h264 software is this one: JM (http://iphome.hhi.de/suehring/tml/).

[kamaleon]

thanks KoD. i'll try to figure out what "reference" means :D

[Shinigami-Sama]

thanks KoD. i'll try to figure out what "reference" means :D

referance to the defined standard

[kamaleon]

you mean there's the standard, and then there's one particular codec that's the "reference" :D

[Shinigami-Sama]

you mean there's the standard, and then there's one particular codec that's the "reference" :D

yes
they make the standard and there needs to be referance encoder so that tests can be made to ceritify that they create compatible datastreams

[kamaleon]

ah, now I see much better, sorry for the OT ;)

[cc979]

if you need a better search try

whatever you are searching for site:forum.doom9.org

eg. h264 encoder 4:2:2 site:forum.doom9.org

[kamaleon]

if you need a better search try whatever you are searching for site:forum.doom9.org
eg. h264 encoder 4:2:2 site:forum.doom9.org

Right on, thanks mate ;) should have thought about that :D

[toytown]

Hi i finally got my Coreavc 1.2 to work today and decided to try it with some new test clips that i got some time ago, but never had the chance to playback due to my bad system.

Now i have a c2d e6600 and im trying to playback a AVC/H264 stream with an average bitrate of 15.5Mbps (1920x1080) and noticing bad framerate and general jerky performance, when i checked task manager i noticed that core is only using 1 core of the processor. Checking the COREAVC page its meant to be SMP for the pro version that i have, now i never got a chance to test this before, due to having a single core machine. But can anybody else confirm this, or give me any reason why this would happen. If i check in WMP, its definetely using COREAVC as the codec, and i totally removed the previous version.

EDIT - I rolled back to a WHQL version of Nvidia drivers and the jerkiness is all gone, still not sure if CORE is using both cores, but the video is playing fine now.

[Romario]

Hi guys, just one thought. CoreAVC 1.2 is cracked. Finally.

[sillKotscha]

Hi guys, just one thought. CoreAVC 1.2 is cracked. Finally.

odd news (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=916887&postcount=118)... wrong place to post...

[pankov]

Betaboy, ... or anybody from the CoreAVC support team. I'm still waiting for the upgrade e-mail
it's almost a month now ... may be I've lost track of time but it's very long anyway ... and I haven't received any response to my PMs, ICQ and e-mail messages (both to CoreAVC support and to Betaboy personally).
May be it's time for me to start looking for an alternative method of getting 1.2
I didn't believe I'll be forced to do this, though
:(

[Rectal Prolapse]

pankov, I feel your pain. I was not happy and vented my frustration here and got flamed for it.

Anyways, moving on:

toytown, it is possible that you still have an old version of CoreAVC kicking around in your system. Did you install any codec packs? I would do a complete search of your C: drive for coreavc.ax files (or whatever it is called) and unregister and delete them. Then reinstall CoreAVC 1.2.

Good luck!

[Hans Ohlo]

one thing i like to be fixed is the following:
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/8547/coremessng9.jpg
the installer misses to remove the old entry in this software list. or it should tell me to remove the old version first (which the new version simply overwrites).

[toytown]

toytown, it is possible that you still have an old version of CoreAVC kicking around in your system

I checked before i posted ,there is only the one dll for core installed and its the 1.2 version registered to myself. With the 97.xx (i think) drivers i would get about 55% total cpu usage and jerky playback, this led me to believe it was only using the 1 core (50% for the video, 5% for other useless windows tasks running).

When i downgraded back to the earlier WHQL nvidia drivers, my cpu usage whilst watching the movie dropped to around 40% usage. Whilst bringing up the statistics i also get about 1-5 dropped frames after running for several minutes. But the cpu never peaked above 60% total usage according to task manager.

This leaves me to believe that its only using 1 core and that taskmanager is only showing usage on both cores due to the task switching cores constantly.

Is it possible that there is a SUPER HIGH quality test mp4 i can use, that would simply not play on a single core machine, or even a method of seeing if the application is really using multiple cores?

[JohnnyFu]

Is it possible that there is a SUPER HIGH quality test mp4 i can use, that would simply not play on a single core machine

Try this one: beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts (http://mirror05.x264.nl/public/force.php?file=./beyonce.at.the.bbc.1080mbaff.sample.ts)
CPU usage is almost 100% the whole time on my 3500+@2.7Ghz (single core).

Do you have the AMD Dual-Core Optimizer (http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_871_9706,00.html) installed ?

[JohnnyFu]

I just wrote a support ticket. 5min later i had a reply.

Ticket ID : 19982
Ticket Title : CoreAVC Installation

Dear ,

The Ticket is replied and the details are :

Status : Open
Category : Big Problem
Severity : Major
Priority :

Description :
Hello, I'm going to format and reinstall my Windows XP system now, as far as i know, after that, i will not be able to install CoreAVC again. This is unacceptable for me. I really hope you can provide a solution.... greetz Johnny I bought your product to support your company... don't throw it away.... otherwise it was the last time i supported you. I will not and can not buy a new license every 2-3 months when i clean up my system....

Solution :










Regards, HelpDesk Team

is this an error or do they kidding me ?

[jchunter_2]

CoreCodec is still taking orders for the CoreAVC codec and charging credit cards for the codec but not delivering anything. :(

[ChronoCross]

I just wrote a support ticket. 5min later i had a reply.



is this an error or do they kidding me ?

you do know that as long as you use the same hardware and windows key you can reactivate automatically right?

[JohnnyFu]

you do know that as long as you use the same hardware and windows key you can reactivate automatically right?

no, i didn't know, thank you :) so... everything should be fine then.

[Sharktooth]

you do know that as long as you use the same hardware and windows key you can reactivate automatically right?
The exact reason why i wont buy it.
I change HW very often...

[Px]

The exact reason why i wont buy it.
I change HW very often...
After my last upgrade I see that I don't need not coreavc, nor powerdvd hwa for now, ffdshow plays even 1080p 24 Mbps streams with 60%/40% cpu cores load.....

[CruNcher]

yes for low complexity streams (progressive) the difference is only 25% now
so you can allready playback 720p H.264 @ 30 fps with 800 mhz (MMX,SSE1) x86

[KoD]

I would like to know where all these numbers come from. Does anyone care to provide some sample files and timed test runs with ffdshow and coreavc ?

[foxyshadis]

I would like to know where all these numbers come from. Does anyone care to provide some sample files and timed test runs with ffdshow and coreavc ?

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=914647#post914647

0.4 tests single-threaded, 1.0-pre tests multithreaded. Only with dual core is the difference huge, and then only if you have something that can actually saturate the system, like hd-dvd.

Ignore fps in timecodec and concentrate on dfps, which measures total time to complete. (fps measures thread-time and gets faked out by the clock wonkiness in speedstep and c&q systems.)

[KoD]

What I would like to see are timed tests from Px and Cruncher that proves the numbers in their posts. I would definitely like to see how ffdshow benefits from the second core for Px and timed tests from Cruncher on that 800 Mhz machine with a 720p file. Let's keep on topic.

[lexor]

What I would like to see are timed tests from Px and Cruncher that proves the numbers in their posts. I would definitely like to see how ffdshow benefits from the second core for Px and timed tests from Cruncher on that 800 Mhz machine with a 720p file. Let's keep on topic.
how is any of that on CoreAVC topic?

[Romario]

BetaBoy gets what he deserves, really!

[Px]

What I would like to see are timed tests from Px and Cruncher that proves the numbers in their posts. I would definitely like to see how ffdshow benefits from the second core for Px and timed tests from Cruncher on that 800 Mhz machine with a 720p file. Let's keep on topic.
http://users.i.com.ua/~finish/HardwareMonitoring.hml
This is RivaTuner text log for playing first 1:47 of this file - http://multimediacom.free.fr/HD-DVD/H264/24Mbps/

[ChronoCross]

http://users.i.com.ua/~finish/HardwareMonitoring.hml
This is RivaTuner text log for playing first 1:47 of this file - http://multimediacom.free.fr/HD-DVD/H264/24Mbps/

This is in this thread why? Why don't you open a new thread for this as it's completely separate from coreavc

[Selur]

little question:

Atm I'm running WinXP but I plan to check out Vista in a couple of weeks (MSDN AA), do I have to fear any problems installing my coreavc pro version on vista?
And If I switch back to WinXP (restore an image) will CoreAVC still run?

Cu Selur

[JohnnyFu]

oh... FYI... current installer is not compatible with Vista... We will release a Vista capable installer later today.

that's all i know about Vista
Restoring an image wich includes an already activated CoreAVC should work i think. But i don't think you will be able to install/activate CoreAVC on Vista if it was activated on an XP installation before.

[KoD]

I agree those last posts were off topic, but someone should have said so when the fire started, not when the house was already burned to ground.

What I don't like is this "let's keep on bashing about everything, it makes us happy" and "nobody complains when we see bashing, we like it that way" attitude. If you have something to complain about, that's the activation system, don't make unfounded estimates on coreavc vs ffdshow performance. Prove your point with test results, those are the only things that matter.

P.S.: Px, how should I interpret that file ? Use Haali's timecodec for easy to interpret results.

[Px]

This is in this thread why? Why don't you open a new thread for this as it's completely separate from coreavc
Maybe because current and future coreavc users interests in inffo about alternative codecs speed? ;)

[ChronoCross]

I think it's just a reason for you guys to get back at core for adding activation. Although I can alter benchmarks to say whatever I want.

It's never really about benchmarks. If it was then you wouldn't be posting it in a competitors thread you'd be posting it in your own thread.

[Foreigner999]

Although it may be ethically questionable im sure people looking to buy Coreavc would welcome a variety of information (accurate of course) that would help them make the best informed decision.

If nero had the best decoder, I sure would want to know it when im looking up info on the best decoder available. I use it, this method, when choosing hardware for my computers so that i can make the best informed decision based on past experience of others.

Besides, Betaboy has in the past welcomed comparisons of coreavc against the competition.

[Px]

It's never really about benchmarks. If it was then you wouldn't be posting it in a competitors thread you'd be posting it in your own thread.
You can read in mind of other peolpe? :D
Or you don't like when someone shows that there is no necessary in your CoreAVC? ;)

[KoD]

Px, I'm still waiting for those timed test runs.

Use null renderer so that no time is spent in graphic card driver calls and we would actually measure codec performance and not graphic card performance; this will also take care of bugs in various driver versions for some of the video renderer modes. Post a link to the file you run the test on, run several times for both ffdshow and coreavc. Use yv12 output only from both so that no time is spent in color conversions. Keep standard deblocking in CoreAVC and in ffdshow do not enable any of the inloop deblocking disabling options on the Codecs page. Run in ffdshow without any other option enabled, that is no resizing, no additional postprocessing, no deinterlacing (ffdshow is silly enough to try performing deinterlacing on non interlaced material and ruin the results). If your material is interlaced, then do test runs without performing deinterlacing in either CoreAVC (no deinterlacing) or ffdshow (deinterlacing tab disabled) and then a test run with software deinterlacing in both CoreAVC (software deinterlacing) and ffdshow (enable the Deinterlace tab and select one deinterlacing method; I'd recommend 5-tap lowpass, although the quality is lower than that of CoreAVC software mode).

And please post here for everyone to see. The PM you sent me did not follow the above procedure, you did not run coreavc and ffdshow separately or at least you did not mention which one was which, and you also changed renderer from one comparison to the next which made it look like an apple to pears comparison.

[Px]

Px, I'm still waiting for those timed test runs.

Use null renderer ......
Ok, when I have enough time to do all that you described, I'll do it....
And fyi - ffdshow now multithreaded in output samples quering, so with null redner only one core used
Run in ffdshow without any other option enabled, that is no resizing, no additional postprocessing.
Fyi - timecodec ignores all this stuff ;)

And please post here for everyone to see. The PM you sent me did not follow the above procedure, you did not run coreavc and ffdshow separately or at least you did not mention which one was which, and you also changed renderer from one comparison to the next which made it look like an apple to pears comparison.
I see, that you don't understand what I wrote to you. Ok, once again: in file, presented above, in first and third columns from end there are cores usage when playing test file. You can see how cpu usage distributed between cores.
Second part, is the fast test of same file, that shows that timecodec if useless for such tests, because
Overlay mixer, 1 core at 100%, second on 3-5%
User: 38s, kernel: 0s, total: 38s, real: 40s, fps: 30.3, dfps: 29.2
VMR9, both cores at 100%
User: 45s, kernel: 0s, total: 45s, real: 51s, fps: 25.8, dfps: 22.8
Same problem with timecodec and hardware accelerated codecs, it don't use hardware acceleration...

[clsid]

CPU usage doesn't mean anything.

To measure the pure decoding performance you should use the null renderer. The only important value is dfps.

When the dfps goes below realtime playback, then stuff like the queue in ffdshow can become a factor and a comparison using Overlay or VMR-9 can be interesting.

Timecodec will use an instance of the ffdshow filter with whatever settings are active in ffdshow. So you must disable all filters in ffdshow.

CoreAVC and ffdshow both don't have hardware accelerated decoding. So that is not an issue.

[ChronoCross]

You can read in mind of other peolpe? :D
Or you don't like when someone shows that there is no necessary in your CoreAVC? ;)

I read the minds of the people who have been posting in this thread as the last 50 posts have all been coreavc bashing. So yeah I think it's reasonable to be a little skeptical of your intentions.

As for not needing coreavc. ffdshow still doesn't come anywhere near it. Sorry to say.

[Px]

CPU usage doesn't mean anything.
Really? So, there is no matter when cpu usage is 100 or 50%? :rolleyes:

CoreAVC and ffdshow both don't have hardware accelerated decoding. So that is not an issue.
That is one on the timecodec problems...

[Px]

I read the minds of the people who have been posting in this thread as the last 50 posts have all been coreavc bashing. So yeah I think it's reasonable to be a little skeptical of your intentions.
Ah, I see, and you are fighting here with those, who don't like CoreAVC? :rolleyes:

As for not needing coreavc. ffdshow still doesn't come anywhere near it. Sorry to say.
Yeah, many playable formats, fast bugfixes, no superior drm scheme, not near, yes :D :D :D

[clsid]

Really? So, there is no matter when cpu usage is 100 or 50%? :rolleyes:Not in the context of running a benchmark in which the dfps is the value of interest.

But this is getting way off-topic.

[ChronoCross]

Ah, I see, and you are fighting here with those, who don't like CoreAVC? :rolleyes:

Yeah, many playable formats, fast bugfixes, no superior drm scheme, not near, yes :D :D :D

We are comparing H264 decoding only. Coreavc still stomps it into the ground. FFdshow does have many uses I'm just saying that it's not up to par on h264 at the moment.......you should move this to it's own thread for discussion. If people want to know about free solutions then they can research it. IT would be like putting a linux sticker on microsoft's homepage.

[Selur]

for those who want to know:

Yes, CoreAVC complains if you change the OS (WinXP->Vista) and gives you an already registered contact support. (-> wrote an email to CoreCodec DOT Sales AT gmail DOT com, 16h ago, let's see how long this takes)

An yes atm. CoreAVC is the best solution out there to playback interlaced avc content like bbc and sky broadcast them.

Cu Selur

[ChronoCross]

Just to let you know the next revision fixes all major issues reported in this thread. One additional issue was found and reported so it will likely be fixed as well.

1 Additional feature was added and although I'm not 100% sure what it does (technically speaking) I'm sure it works as it's probably the solution for interlacing issues.

[clsid]

Too bad that it takes ages before updates are actually released...

[DeepBeepMeep]

Just to let you know the next revision fixes all major issues reported in this thread. One additional issue was found and reported so it will likely be fixed as well.

1 Additional feature was added and although I'm not 100% sure what it does (technically speaking) I'm sure it works as it's probably the solution for interlacing issues.


ChronoCross can you confirm whether the colorspace issue has been fixed (wrong black and white levels if coreavc is not directly connected to VRM9 renderer) ? Thanks

[ChronoCross]

ChronoCross can you confirm whether the colorspace issue has been fixed (wrong black and white levels if coreavc is not directly connected to VRM9 renderer) ? Thanks

do you have a source or method for directly testing this. I remember the issue I just can't remember how to reproduce it.

[pankov]

ChronoCross,
it seems like you have some kind of direct contact with Core people. If I'm not wrong, can you, pleaaaaase, point them to my registration problem, because it's now more than a month ... and I still haven't received the 1.2 update :(
I've written them probably a dozen e-mails/PM/ICQ messages without any response. I really don't like to miss this update too
:(

[Eeknay]

do you have a source or method for directly testing this. I remember the issue I just can't remember how to reproduce it.

http://www.dryfire.org/~gits/black-coreavc-bug.ts

It seems to only affect PAFF streams AFAIK. libavcodec/powerdvd et al display the correct levels, CoreAVC will if you use VMR9 + Fix VMR9, but not on Overlay.

[Selur]

thx to danny for resetting my account. :)

[Jay Bee]

Maybe this has already been fixed but there is another problem with deinterlacing. Look at the green light at the end of the pitwall. It keeps popping out of its housing in every other frame.
http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/8037/41080i50avc10000mp40000vg0.jpg
The file was encoded using the Elecard encoder and this problem only happens when CoreAVC is set to DirectShow deinterlacing. The problem goes away if you encode MBAFF instead of pure interlaced.

[DeepBeepMeep]

http://www.dryfire.org/~gits/black-coreavc-bug.ts

It seems to only affect PAFF streams AFAIK. libavcodec/powerdvd et al display the correct levels, CoreAVC will if you use VMR9 + Fix VMR9, but not on Overlay.

In addition the option "fix VMR9 colors" won't have any effect if there is a filter between coreavc and the video renderer (for instance ffdshow). It seems to me that the color fix is done using hardware means or by propagating some flags and this obviously lost if you use overlay or if a software filter is inserted.

I had sent a sample to betaboy to do some testing so he sould be aware of the bug but since I nevor got any feedback...

[Rectal Prolapse]

Is it necessary to use FFDShow with CoreAVC in some situations? So far I haven't found a need but am curious why someone would use it.

It is possible that FFDShow inserts itself after CoreAVC even when unwanted (usually when Raw video is enabled). I found a way of preventing this by modifying the source code of current FFDShow builds so that FFDShow will refuse to load if it finds that CoreAVC is in the graph.

I posted the relevant source code changes on avsforum.com in one of the recent FFDShow threads - however, it is not really useable by the average user. It's more of an experiment really, but could be of use - PM for details and I'll try to dig up the diffs.

[DeepBeepMeep]

It could be useful to add ffdshow after coreavc in any of these cases:
- Add subtitles
- Use a custom software deinterlacer
- Any post processing (edge enhancements, etc...)

Anyway since we don't buy here a fully fonctional AVC player but we buy a Directshow filter we should expect to be able to put in any graph...

[taz291819]

http://www.dryfire.org/~gits/black-coreavc-bug.ts

It seems to only affect PAFF streams AFAIK. libavcodec/powerdvd et al display the correct levels, CoreAVC will if you use VMR9 + Fix VMR9, but not on Overlay.

I'm very curious of this as well, since I prefer Overlay. My HTPC has the horsepower for VMR9, but to me eyes, overlay looks a tad sharper.

[JohnnyFu]

What's new in the upcomming version ?

[Foreigner999]

What happened to the addon of CoreAAC 2.0?

Will the issue of downgrading of 4 cores to 2 cores be resolved in this new version?

Will Coreavc support the .EVO file format from ripped HD-DVD's?

Lets hope your as agressive in forums post answering as you are in emails ;)

[pankov]

Foreigner999,
do you say that you've received e-mails from Betaboy/Core team?
I'm trying to contact them for more than a month now without ANY success
:(
this is getting ridiculous

[Inventive Software]

@Pankov: Actually read the whole thread before making a judgement and you'll find what Foreigner999's on about.

[BetaBoy]

What happened to the addon of CoreAAC 2.0?

Will the issue of downgrading of 4 cores to 2 cores be resolved in this new version?

Will Coreavc support the .EVO file format from ripped HD-DVD's?

Lets hope your as agressive in forums post answering as you are in emails ;)

We will still be adding CoreAAC later on. We will not however add it till we have finished our AAC v2 (plus) support.

On multicore support... we never downgraded... it was a matter of what the decoder core was capable of... hence why I changed it from 4 to 2. However will we will be adding further enhancements for additional cores in q future release.

On .EVO ... yes but give me a little bit to post more details.

[BetaBoy]

Foreigner999,
do you say that you've received e-mails from Betaboy/Core team?
I'm trying to contact them for more than a month now without ANY success
:(
this is getting ridiculous

Pankov.... I have now sent you well over a dozen emails in the past month... I will now attempt to send you one from an older Comcast account I have.

[BetaBoy]

On a side note.... CoreAVC is now an integrated solution within 'The Venice Project' as noted by TVP's Fredrik de Wahl here: http://newteevee.com/2007/01/11/venice-project-mozilla/

[Foreigner999]

We will still be adding CoreAAC later on. We will not however add it till we have finished our AAC v2 (plus) support.

On multicore support... we never downgraded... it was a matter of what the decoder core was capable of... hence why I changed it from 4 to 2. However will we will be adding further enhancements for additional cores in q future release.

On .EVO ... yes but give me a little bit to post more details.

Good luck with the new venture your product will support.

Is CoreAAC v2 (plus) projected to be added with the 1.xx series of CoreAVC?

Is multicore support for 4 processors projected to be reintroduced for the version 1.xx series of CoreAVC?

[BetaBoy]

Thx.... yes CoreAAC and more multicore support will be added for 1.xx. Multicore has limitations but thats for a different discussion later on when we get around to the devel on it.

[Selur]

About the coreaac support: aac->ac3->spdif isn't a feature to come, is it? (using ffdshow for aac->ac3->spdif atm. )

Cu Selur

[pankov]

Pankov.... I have now sent you well over a dozen emails in the past month... I will now attempt to send you one from an older Comcast account I have.

BetaBoy,
you can't imagin how glad I'm that you are working on my problem.
:)
To help you with something could you tell me what can I do so you can send me an e-mail to a different address, not the one @yahoo.com. Can we discuss this with PMs or ICQ?

[popper]

On a side note.... CoreAVC is now an integrated solution within 'The Venice Project' as noted by TVP's Fredrik de Wahl here: http://newteevee.com/2007/01/11/venice-project-mozilla/

very nice, i still think that 'The Venice Project' should have UDP multicasting DHT tunnels as an option to help encurage general bandwidth savings alongside AVC/H.264 .

they did'nt reply to my requests/info, arr well.

im still hopeing for a CoreAVC for the PPC linux soon (as in 'power PC' not that other one)
so that things like the Pegasos 8641D boards can use it to good effect in all the consumer linux projects it will help, AVC car kit,wireless Mesh video, and far more.

http://www.powerdeveloper.org/8641d.php

[RedSlug]

Betaboy.

Can you tell me if CoreAVC codec will allow me to view files from the Sony SR1E camcorder. And therefore edit them in an NLE?

Thanks

(BTW, i cannot get to the http://corecodec.org/ at all :( )

[clsid]

If the NLE of your choice requires a VFW codec, then CoreAVC won't work, since it a DirectShow filter.

ffdshow is free and contains a VFW interface for decoding H.264

[Hans Ohlo]

i do not know if you noticed, but the 64bit version of vista ships with a 64bit media center (but wmp11 is still 32bit). so nothing without a 64bit decoder and/or splitter will be played. please consider this for the next (hopefully not so distant) release of coreavc.

[ChronoCross]

that basically screws pretty much every codec in existence right now.....

[Romario]

You are right, ChronoCross. Somebody must do something, we can't stick to 32-bit forever.

[agentjoe]

Can anyone provide me the latest CoreAVCDecoder.ax ?!

[JohnnyFu]

Can anyone provide me the latest CoreAVCDecoder.ax ?!

CoreAVC isn't free. www.coreavc.com

[BetaBoy]

i do not know if you noticed, but the 64bit version of vista ships with a 64bit media center (but wmp11 is still 32bit). so nothing without a 64bit decoder and/or splitter will be played. please consider this for the next (hopefully not so distant) release of coreavc.

CoreAVC 64 bit is planned around the time we release our Enterprise Edition as well as our initial CoreAVC Encoder.

On a side note... The next release of CoreAVC will be released around the time Vista is released (1/30) as we have Vista enhancements as well as the pre-mentioned bug fixes and improved registration process. This will also include Haali's latest non-public splitter.

[JohnnyFu]

Any news from the DXVA-Front, Betaboy ?

[BetaBoy]

Any news from the DXVA-Front, Betaboy ?

Yes, but nothing I can comment on publically atm.

[Hans Ohlo]

nice to hear. can you comment on the vista enhancements? any word on coreASP?

[DeepBeepMeep]

Yes, but nothing I can comment on publically atm.

Betaboy, any news regarding the incorrect black and white levels bug?

[ChronoCross]

Betaboy, any news regarding the incorrect black and white levels bug?

as far as I could tell it was fixed.

[Hans Ohlo]

as far as I could tell it was fixed.
nope, in version 1.2 it is still there.

[ChronoCross]

I wasn't talking about 1.2. I was talking about the beta build. sorry for not being clear

[SaadShams]

whats the fps @ D1 resolution?

regards
Saad
__________________________
GetOneByOne (http://getonebyone.googlepages.com)Free CS Books/Papers
WebpageDirectory (http://webpagedirectory.googlepages.com)Free Web Directory

[BetaBoy]

Betaboy, any news regarding the incorrect black and white levels bug?

Its been fixed as far as the reports have stated.

[BetaBoy]

nice to hear. can you comment on the vista enhancements? any word on coreASP?
CoreASP will be released with our Directshow decoder bundle pack for windows and CE.

[blubberbirne]

The next release of CoreAVC will be released around the time Vista is released (1/30)

Hi,

Vista is released ;) System Builder Version is out since 18th Januar :p

[Shinigami-Sama]

Hi,

Vista is released ;) System Builder Version is out since 18th Januar :p

public release...
I've had my copy of it for a week now already
getting around to installing it soon

but is it really so long to wait another week?

[Foreigner999]

I wasn't talking about 1.2. I was talking about the beta build. sorry for not being clear

ChronoCross I assume this means you were a beta tester?

Betaboy will the new version bring along with it any better (and timely) support than was seen with v1.2? I mean is CoreCodec in a better position now to take care of glitches as they happen?:D

[Ginsonic]

Betaboy will the new version bring along with it any better (and timely) support than was seen with v1.2?
Hopefully, especially for all of us, who even have not received their first update to 1.2 :mad:

[Gnerma]

I'm planning on dual booting XP & Vista on my primary system for the foreseeable future. Will I be allowed to use CoreAVC on both OS'?

[BlackSun]

No, the license is bound to the OS. We can reset your activation if you wish to transfer it to Vista, but not to use it on both OS'.

[BetaBoy]

No, the license is bound to the OS. We can reset your activation if you wish to transfer it to Vista, but not to use it on both OS'.

Might I also add that we do this as a courtesy to our 1.xx customers and we eat the cost do so. This free upgrade will not be 'forever' but only for the first few weeks that Vista is released for the early adopters.

[toytown]

This free upgrade will not be 'forever' but only for the first few weeks that Vista is released for the early adopters.

So if i decide to upgrade to vista later on in the year, my version of coreavc bites the dust? Lol customer service at its finest.

[Inventive Software]

Might I also add that we do this as a courtesy to our 1.xx customers and we eat the cost do so. This free upgrade will not be 'forever' but only for the first few weeks that Vista is released for the early adopters.

This to accomodate for people with the inevitable teething problems with Vista? ;)

[Disabled]

Might I also add that we do this as a courtesy to our 1.xx customers and we eat the cost do so. This free upgrade will not be 'forever' but only for the first few weeks that Vista is released for the early adopters.

Youre kidding are you? Are you saying I'm not able to switch operating systems (for free) in the forseeable future anymore? If so, what will it cost to change the OS in the future and If I pay to do so, will I still be allowed to use it on the old system?

[BetaBoy]

This to accomodate for people with the inevitable teething problems with Vista? ;)
A little OT... But those that are considering a Vista upgrade might want to read this article first....

"A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

[LeMoi]

I didn't know it was your role to dissuade people to install Vista :D

[Inventive Software]

That job falls to this thread! :D

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=116701

[Foreigner999]

Wait, I thought the Core Account's reset license feature was meant to:
A) reset for a license to move to another install. (you strongly hinted if not outright implied this)
B) To be flexible to allow people who are upgrading hardware to move their (only) installation to a new reinstallation.
C) To support people who are moving thier single license to another machine (sold the old one, moved on to a laptop, robbed or simply no longer in possesion of the old Windows License key.

Can we have a spelling out (in fine print) of what exactly the reset feature is supposed to do _NOW_ in this new revision of CC policy.:thanks:

[Rectal Prolapse]

People who dual-boot cannot use CoreAVC on both installs. That's how I read it, even if they are both XP. Right? Hmmm I think I asked this before and someone answered. Too bad I can't remember when that was posted.

[Chainmax]

People, there's a dedicated thread for CoreAVC-related rantings in this very subforum. Take your business there.

[Foreigner999]

People, there's a dedicated thread for CoreAVC-related rantings in this very subforum. Take your business there.

Woops true. How do I move my last post to the other thread (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775&page=11)?

Anyone know if CoreAVC 1.2.5 will add GPU support?

[Gnerma]

Can we have a spelling out (in fine print) of what exactly the reset feature is supposed to do _NOW_ in this new revision of CC policy.Foreigner999's understanding of the policy was similar to mine. I'd like to second the request quoted above.


A little OT... But those that are considering a Vista upgrade might want to read this article first....

"A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
Say what you will about the DRM in Windows Vista but the activation scheme is flexible enough to allow reinstalls, and significant hardware changes. You're making it sound like changing to another supported operating system, or reinstalling your operating system is not allowed. Please clarify.

For anybody suggesting it, I am not ranting. I am a coreavc license holder wanting to understand what I can and cannot do.

[Foreigner999]

@betaboy
Will we get a clarification about the activation reset issue before Vista/CoreAVC is (hopefully) released?:confused:

[Hans Ohlo]

asked another way: what will the vista version of coreavc add to justify the enforcement of a new license in six months?

why shouldn't it be possible to transfer my license in 6 months over to vista?

right now vista is not usable for me as media center os, just because the drivers for many hardware parts are not up to it right now.

another question arises, if i want to test if coreavc runs without problems on my media rig under vista why should i have to transfer it everytime i want to test it?

scewed up drm i call this customer spoof!

i want answers to these questions! i PAYED for the license at a time where it wasn't dongled to a specific OS! why can you just change the eula to whatever terms you want?

[HeadBangeR77]

i PAYED for the license at a time where it wasn't dongled to a specific OS! why can you just change the eula to whatever terms you want?
Opinion from an outsider: EULA is a part of a contract you've made while buying the product, hence a consumer should be informed of any changes. Secondly, in case of important changes you should have the right to finish the contract, but it's all theory and I'm not sure if it's so easily applied to products like the discussed one (though, it should be).*

* Yes, I'm a lawyer, but I don't deal with consumers' protection. I just named general rules, that should apply to any kind of contract, at least in the european meaning (excluding anglo-saxon case-law system).

[Jay Bee]

Did you not notice that with 1.0 there is no EULA? In our honest opinion (and our counsels) EULA's are useless.

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=838162#post838162

[Hans Ohlo]

Might I also add that we do this as a courtesy to our 1.xx customers and we eat the cost do so. This free upgrade will not be 'forever' but only for the first few weeks that Vista is released for the early adopters.
upgrade to what?
upgrade to the very same version? wow why did noone else got this brilliant idea!

[Disabled]

Opinion from an outsider: EULA is a part of a contract you've made while buying the product, hence a consumer should be informed of any changes. Secondly, in case of important changes you should have the right to finish the contract, but it's all theory and I'm not sure if it's so easily applied to products like the discussed one (though, it should be).*

* Yes, I'm a lawyer, but I don't deal with consumers' protection. I just named general rules, that should apply to any kind of contract, at least in the european meaning (excluding anglo-saxon case-law system).

I think the problem is a little more complex here, as there was no defined contract I paid for. I paid for a thing called CoreAVC Pro with GPU, quad core support, no activation crap, etc and features about to change. Youre the lawyer, tell me what I have to accept them to change and what can I expect them to add before droping my free updates?

[HeadBangeR77]

I think the problem is a little more complex here, as there was no defined contract I paid for.
When you buy a product such as this one, you make a "sales contract" (know, sounds stupid instead of "purchase", but it's simply named like that in Poland, UK, USA and probably many other countries around the world, however not in Germany). Some things don't change, so in many aspects it's similar to buying a single egg from a folk on a marketplace. :D At least the product, its main features, and the price should be specified. It's the second thing you're all missing here (I haven't read through this thread and I'm not gonna do this), so it seems to me at least.

I paid for a thing called CoreAVC Pro with GPU, quad core support, no activation crap, etc and features about to change.
Where is the above stated? Was it a part of some EULA or just marketing crap? Did they state that on their webpage as product's features (this would suffice)? EULA is an important thing, because it is a part of general terms and condititions of a trade. Large companies do not negotatie with single folks like us, just publish general terms. However, they should be specified, easy to check, and shouldn't change too much without notice. If someone says an EULA is not needed, then how would you know what you can and what you can't do with software? Becasue someone has written something e.g. here on this forum? Is he a legal representative of the company?

Youre the lawyer, tell me what I have to accept them to change and what can I expect them to add before droping my free updates?
I think you should all contact some consumers' protection org - I'm not involved in this thread, so I can't tell you out of my head, what you have to accept, and what you don't (and when you could terminate such a contract and if you would get anything back).

Btw. I'm into telecommunications ;)

good luck!

[Disabled]

...

The features I mentioned were on their site and in the readme from the software package I got from them. The problem is, some of them were features not yet implemented and had the tag "to be included" together with "features about to change". The real problem I see is they force crap on us (activation, trashing the licence with new OS) if we want to get the promised features.

As stated above, there was no EULA for Version 1.0 and they don't give a shit about one. And yes, Betaboy is a representative of CoreCodec.

[Seb.26]

[edit] Auto-Moderate ... not here to plant (more) bad-ideas ...

But BetaBoy, your reaction is really "funny" ... IMO ... particularly about "discussion" you want to do ... now ... lol

[BetaBoy]

Moderators, please throttle this to the 'rants thread'... I welcome the discussion there, not in this thread.

[BetaBoy]

Here is the current changelog for the next release of CoreAVC. Note we are still doing QA on a few things so we might get the chance to add/change before the release:

CoreAVC H.264 Video Codec - Version 1.2.5.0
- Add: YUV Levels fix can now be enabled always, never, and for VMR9 only
- Add: An option to treat frames as interlaced when any AVC interlace coding options are used (fixes a problem with some broadcast streams that are not deinterlaced properly)
- Add: An option to always crop 1088 video to 1080 lines (enabled by default)
- Add: Recovery point SEIs are now properly handled when IDR frames are not available
- Add: Installer: Official support for Vista
- Add: Installer: Support for CoreNumber XP/Vista re-installs without having to re-register the codec
- Fix: Deblocking with extreme settings fixed
- Fix: VMR deinterlacing (interlaced YV12 output does not work properly with VMR9, we now use YUY2 in that case)
- Fix: Various (non-public) stream bugs reported by our OEM customers
- OEM: Added the new options to IPropertyBag
- OEM: Documentation on the related CorePlayer Colorspace Conversion
- OEM: Documentation for custom IPropertyBag interface
- OEM: Documentation for SDK toolkit and Demo toolkit

Haali Media Splitter - Version 1.7.60.20 (20070131)
- Add: Complete 3gp subtitles support when used with Gabest's VSFilter/Media Player Classic
- Add: A shell property page for media files
- Add: A better video shrinking method to the Video Renderer
- Add: A separate option to set the number of queued frames in Video Renderer
- Add: Video Renderer now uses multiple passes instead of complex shaders, and works on PS 1.1 hardware. Bicubic scaling is available staring with PS 1.4
- Add: DTS support in MPEG TS streams
- Add: A much better deinterlacer to the Video Renderer
- Add: Type 1 DV in AVI support to the splitter
- Add: Minimal support for reference files in MOV container (useful when playing files over http)
- Add: Minimal support for Bluray m2ts files (only tested with MPEG2/AC3)
- Add: Use BITMAPINFOHEADER to passthrough aspect ratio when using WMV3 video in Matroska (only works when using the Video Renderer for playback)
- Fix: Swapped width/height returns in the Video Renderer (Fixes incorrect video display in Zoom Player)
- Fix: Does not show error message dialogs when invoked from the shell
- Fix: A horizontal phase shift in Video Renderer
- Fix: A startup delay in Video Renderer on uniprocessor systems
- Fix: Seeking in WMV files when played with a Video Renderer
- Fix: Seeking when cues in matroska file are invalid
- Fix: Audio track switching to AAC tracks
- Fix: Handling of wrapping PTS in MPEG TS streams
- Fix: Video streams changing when using Matroska files with Ordered Chapters
- Fix: AVI subtitles handling
- Fix: Compatibility with ACM wrapper filter
- Fix: A rare crash during Simple Splitter destruction
- Fix: A muxer bug when a sample extends past the movie's end (rarely happens with subtitles)
- Fix: Matroska muxer to always use NALU size length of 4
- Fix: Eliminated tearing on some hardware when not using Soft VSync in the Video Renderer
- Fix: Better compatibility with DVD playback using a Video Renderer (still not perfect)

[Disabled]

Moderators, please throttle this to the 'rants thread'... I welcome the discussion there, not in this thread.

In my opinion you can easily throttle down this thread. Just answer asked questions and we will either be quite or go to the ranting thread and bitch about your words. But in my opinion its not ranting to ask what we are allowed to do. And as you don't answer, we have to talk about what you are [not] allowed to do with us.


*edit*
Sorry, saw it late:

- Add: Installer: Support for CoreNumber XP/Vista re-installs without having to re-register the codec

Can you please explain this feature? How does it work? Can I reformat my PC and install Vista? Can I buy a new computer and transfer the licence? Does it need an internet connection to reinstall?

[BetaBoy]

Disabled...

- If you have purchased XP OR Vista and install CoreAVC and then do a OS re-install (this means a refresh not a fresh install) the codec does not need to be re-registered with our servers.

- If by FORMAT you mean having XP installed and then formatting and then installing Vista no.

- Transfer to another PC, no... your license is directly tied to your OS serial number (I have stated this here and at CoreCodec several times over the past few months).

- An internet connection is required to install and activate the codec properly... as I have stated in this thread we are working on an 'activation wizard' to help with activation and even allow the user to activate offline. But it will not be in this release as we are still adding features to it.

As a point of reference for anyone with further questions.... we have just brought up http://support.corecodec.com and are transferring all the current CoreAVC knowledgebase content over to the new KB for the launch.

[Foreigner999]

Wait, I thought the Core Account's reset license feature was meant to:
A) reset for a license to move to another install. (you strongly hinted if not outright implied this)
B) To be flexible to allow people who are upgrading hardware to move their (only) installation to a new reinstallation.
C) To support people who are moving thier single license to another machine (sold the old one, moved on to a laptop, robbed or simply no longer in possesion of the old Windows License key.

Can we have a spelling out (in fine print) of what exactly the reset feature is supposed to do _NOW_ in this new revision of CC policy.:thanks:

Sorry for quoting myself but it was easier this way for me. Can you tell me if the upper scenario's will work anymore?

By the way who in the world would reinstall their operating system on top of a buggy or damaged or infested old partition with their old OS? Reformat has always been a good policy of mine on the computers i have worked on unless they paid me more to revive thier old installtion because of precious files.

Im glad to see you rolled out a support site, Very good in my book for the customers.

What exactly is the reset activation feature for then? What was it exactly intended to do?

Edit: Read the posts and got some answers but not all

a) No
b) Yes (If XP/VISTA allows you to move your license of XP/VISTA)
C) No* (allowed, if xp accepts you moving your license to another machine) Tied to your XP/Vista License Permanently

[BetaBoy]

By the way who in the world would reinstall their operating system on top of a buggy or damaged or infested old partition with their old OS? Reformat has always been a good policy of mine on the computers i have worked on unless they paid me more to revive thier old installtion because of precious files.

Alot more then you may think... from our demograhic it seems at least 30%.


Im glad to see you rolled out a support site, Very good in my book for the customers.
It was something we wanted to integrate into the Core account system itself (which it does) but because of the volume we are doing we needed a larger solution. BTW... this uses the same 'unified' Core Account ID/Pass login. The same will be for our new CoreCodec.com portal and forums, which will be launched by the end of this month.

What exactly is the reset activation feature for then? What was it exactly intended to do?
This will be a featured link on you Core Account via our services portal for all users, this will also be in the wizard that will allow a user to reset a 'FRESH' install with our servers.

The end result of all of this is to 'give the users the power' without alot of interaction on our side.

[Disabled]

- If by FORMAT you mean having XP installed and then formatting and then installing Vista no.

- Transfer to another PC, no... your license is directly tied to your OS serial number (I have stated this here and at CoreCodec several times over the past few months).


Thanks for the information and confirmation. Sorry, but you wrote so much things at different times that I wanted to have it confirmed. I acted accordingly (see sig).
I'm off

[Foreigner999]

@Disabled

Is that being sold with a depreciated value or is that the standard version? How did you set up a core account without using the installer?

[popper]

Opinion from an outsider: EULA is a part of a contract you've made while buying the product, hence a consumer should be informed of any changes. Secondly, in case of important changes you should have the right to finish the contract, but it's all theory and I'm not sure if it's so easily applied to products like the discussed one (though, it should be).*

* Yes, I'm a lawyer, but I don't deal with consumers' protection. I just named general rules, that should apply to any kind of contract, at least in the european meaning (excluding anglo-saxon case-law system).


im suprised that the US consumer law doesnt seem to protect you (assuming so as non of you have mentioned it as yet?) like the UK consumer goods and services act etc see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/ for a good practical place to learn your rights and ENFORCE them if needs be.

and the fact all consumer contracts (EULA,T&C etc) have to have reciprication or you can have them removed as void.


it not clear that any wrong doing is infact happening here and it seems just a small miss-understanding or human error (we all make mistakes from time to time after all being human)is being blown out of proportion perhaps...... it may become clearer soon if the effort is made.:o

[BetaBoy]

it not clear that any wrong doing is infact happening here and it seems just a small miss-understanding or human error (we all make mistakes from time to time after all being human)is being blown out of proportion perhaps...... it may become clearer soon if the effort is made.

In the end we want everyone to be happy (not gonna happen but we will try hard)... from a business perspective on the registrations side... I can say that once we added server auth that our registrations went up 10x from where they were at before it. Maybe its a fluke, maybe its a fact of the popularity of H.264 becoming more mainstream now. But being that we are a small bunch of devels and that have most our our roots in our open source efforts with no VC funding, every dollar counts to continuation of our success.

To that... www.CoreForge.org is now OPEN for open source audio and video hosting as we will now be closing www.CoreCodec.org and moving all the projects over to CoreForge in the next 2 weeks.

[popper]

In the end we want everyone to be happy (not gonna happen but we will try hard)... from a business perspective on the registrations side... I can say that once we added server auth that our registrations went up 10x from where they were at before it. Maybe its a fluke, maybe its a fact of the popularity of H.264 becoming more mainstream now. But being that we are a small bunch of devels and that have most our our rooted efforts in our open source efforts with no VC funding, every dollar counts to continuation of our success.

To that... www.CoreForge.org is now OPEN for open source audio and video hosting as we will now be closing www.CoreCodec.org and moving all the projects over to CoreForge in the next 2 weeks.

your to modest BetaBoy, the fact is your coreAVC is in a class all its own and because of that people have been advocating it to the masses everywere as it the only SW codec that can keep up.

i do wish we can get A PPC linux version though :D for the likes of the genesi boards and the kiloCORE , you get to do a kiloCORE version one day LOL once a board comes out with that FPGA included ( iv mentioned that before and not just off the cuff as an end user but put some thought in to pointing you to that in the past so as to see reactions and possabilitys etc).

http://bbrv.blogspot.com/2006/10/wanting-what-you-have.html

its clear it hard to balance the business side with the end user side and building the trust in both directions, but theres always options and im hopeful we can all (90%+)be happy eventually.

im interested in how the venice project http://newteevee.com/2007/01/11/venice-project-mozilla/
licence manages to work given they are the licencees rather than the end user (i asume).

there are a many new markets that could take advantage of your IP its just a matter of thinking a new and forgetting the old school ways, micro payments being one of many options for instance see bbrv's blog etc.

[BetaBoy]

Popper... thx... with GPU coming and our encoders later this year we are gonna be busy ;-)

You will here more about CoreAVC and Joost in the next couple of weeks as it moves towards it's 1.0 release. Till then, I can't comment anymore on it.

[BetaBoy]

I also wanted to clarify on XP/Vista... as I had previously stated we _are_ allowing uprades to Vista for the next couple of weeks for the early adopters for free. However its one or the other not both OS's.

[popper]

Popper... thx... with GPU coming and our encoders later this year we are gonna be busy ;-)

You will here more about CoreAVC and Joost in the next couple of weeks as it moves towards it's 1.0 release. Till then, I can't comment anymore on it.


good we need a fast AVC encoder as we cant seem to get interest in good easy OSS multi-machine lan AVC encoding for some reason.

and tell the venice lads to put friggin UDP Multicasting over ipv4 tunnels in their server/client apps so we can start saving massive bandwidth and start to bring it into the mainstream, and perhaps force the ISP's to rethink their refuseale to
finally re-activate multicasting in all their routers for end users to start innovating and save upload/download bandwidth.

the tubes guys dont seem interested in real innovating and dont seem interested in saving bandwidth with multicasting , meary playing the oldhat P2P card over standard server space with a keyword twist for getting news coverage.

AVC multicast web streaming would be cool if the easy (gui)tools were available and widespread even if we needed to tunnel that to begin with.

[Foreigner999]

@betaboy

Is GPU support ready for the next release? I wanted to ask if Nvidia/ATI or Intel/AMD or whomever is helping you had asked you to sign an NDA, why would they help you when they have a product themselves that they sell for hardware acceleration? I might be completely misunderstanding.

With the GPU support acceleration, will that be propreitary technology of that company or is it like a GPGPU implementation running an advanced CoreCodec propreitary implementation?

And if your NDA keeps you from touching that one....will your encoder use the GPU to accelerate Encoding in a future product? What about that thread i saw you post about secondary licenses (http://www.corecodec.com/forum/index.php?topic=3728.0) at a discounted rate? When will that be released to the masses? I can live with cheap throw away licenses and am willing to stay on board the titanic as long as the plans are flexible.:devil:

Is there anyway to sign up for the corecodec account system without having to install v1.2?

[HeadBangeR77]

Excuse me to interrupt once again, but it's getting interesting from my point of view ...

"Add: Installer: Support for CoreNumber XP/Vista re-installs without having to re-register the codec"
First you add this (as general terms and conditions? EULA? simple readme? it does matter). The above statement could mean many different things, so people ask questions ... and ...

"- If you have purchased XP OR Vista and install CoreAVC and then do a OS re-install (this means a refresh not a fresh install) the codec does not need to be re-registered with our servers."
(...)
"Alot more than you may think... from our demograhic it seems at least 30%."

Name the source of your statistics, please. For me it sounds absurd. For most of us re-install means "format c:\" and a fresh system afterwards. M$ allows to do this, and you don't - at least peculiar imho. It shows how misleading was and is the first statement of yours.

"- If by FORMAT you mean having XP installed and then formatting and then installing Vista no."
Basically, no format allowed, no matter what a user will instal after that. Could you include such a statement in your EULA or would it scare off potential buyers? :D

I've got nothing against moving this to the "ranting thread", although I wouldn't call it "ranting" personally - I would call it "trying to be precise".

regards,
HDBR77

PS. Also :
- What's the mentioned re-registration connected with?
- What hardware changes are allowed and how your product could detect them (if at all)?
- What about restoring a system partition from an image with e.g. Norton Ghost?

PS2. I think you should have 3 threads actually : the technical one, the legal one, and the pure ranting one. ;)

[Foreigner999]

Excuse me to interrupt once again, but it's getting interesting from my point of view ...

"Add: Installer: Support for CoreNumber XP/Vista re-installs without having to re-register the codec"
First you add this (as general terms and conditions? EULA? simple readme? it does matter). The above statement could mean many different things, so people ask questions ... and ...

"- If you have purchased XP OR Vista and install CoreAVC and then do a OS re-install (this means a refresh not a fresh install) the codec does not need to be re-registered with our servers."
(...)
"Alot more than you may think... from our demograhic it seems at least 30%."

Name the source of your statistics, please. For me it sounds absurd. For most of us re-install means "format c:\" and a fresh system afterwards. M$ allows to do this, and you don't - at least peculiar imho. It shows how misleading was and is the first statement of yours.


I thought this was also odd for statistics. How you collect that info and verify or come to that knowledge I haven't the slightest clue, but I have seen plenty of dummies who reformat their computers every thirty days because they dont know how to take measures to ensure a healthy system. I was one of those dummies when I was 7.

Betaboy there are still some questions lurking up above if you have a chance.

[Seb.26]

@Betaboy ...
... sorry if already asked ( I haven't found answer here by "search" )

But why are you including "Haali Media Splitter" changelog with yours ?!
( what is the link between you & Haali ?! :confused: )

(NB: I've edited my last post ... ;) )

[BetaBoy]

Seb.26... The license is not transferable. If was within the first 15 days I can issue you a refund.

On Haali.... I have discussed this a few times in this thread... He is a one of our main developers and HMS is a major part of CoreAVC and our Directshow efforts for both Windows and CE. Haali also interjects splitter code into our CorePlayer Framework as well.

Spoiler: HMS will also play an even large role for us in going forward including supporting the upcoming Matroska Menu System which will be a part of next years CoreAVC 2.0

[Seb.26]

Seb.26... The license is not transferable. If was within the first 15 days I can issue you a refund.
Already done ( refund ... ) ... just for the "fun" ... :D

On Haali.... I have discussed this a few times in this thread...
Ok, sorry ... thanks for repeating ... :o
( That's great for you ... IMHO, Haali is really a good coder ! :) )

[Hans Ohlo]

betaboy:
asked another way: what will the vista version of coreavc add to justify the enforcement of a new license in six months?

why shouldn't it be possible to transfer my license in 6 months over to vista?

right now vista is not usable for me as media center os, just because the drivers for many hardware parts are not up to it right now.

another question arises, if i want to test if coreavc runs without problems on my media rig under vista why should i have to transfer it everytime i want to test it?

these are important questions. please answer!

tell us the reason to tie a decoder license to an os license. and then tell us what this has to do with the fact that we should only run one license on one mashine. and please answer this, becaus this would break your neck in court, because there is no legal reason to do so.

[Oxygen]

Spoiler: HMS will also play an even large role for us in going forward including supporting the upcoming Matroska Menu System which will be a part of next years CoreAVC 2.0

If the HMS could be more flexible error-wise speaking on the container/containee it would be even nicer ...

[ChronoCross]

betaboy:


these are important questions. please answer!

tell us the reason to tie a decoder license to an os license. and then tell us what this has to do with the fact that we should only run one license on one mashine. and please answer this, becaus this would break your neck in court, because there is no legal reason to do so.


The questions have already been answered many time. you bough a single Pc single OS license. Not a "I can use it everywhere I feel like it" License.

That is why you cannot use it on 800 different machines and OS's

[toytown]

The questions have already been answered many time. you bough a single Pc single OS license

This was not mentioned when i purchased the software.

This was not mentioned when i installed the software (there is no EULA i have to accept, except for haali media splitter)

This was not mentioned in the readme from the version of software i recieved.

This was not mentioned in any emails i recieved during purchase or after.

This was not mentioned to me on there website when i purchased COREAVC.

So is this something core just decided later on, when they decided they could fleece money twice from there customers who were going to upgrade to vista later on?

[Inventive Software]

FFS, what's the big deal here? So they decided to tie you down to one OS install, big f*****g deal. Stop throwing your toys out of the pram and accept this is how most paid-for software will be. Just be glad back in the day that you could move it about as you liked. That goes for Windows too before that had activation.

Betaboy, back me up here will ya? Sounds like an unhappy customer who just doesn't like what he reads! :D

[Eretria-chan]

If one doesn't like it, then we embrace it? If we don't complain, will anything ever change? I really think that you should tell users that it's tied to the OS and hardware and that you're purchasing a single license.
On the other hand, I think the activation and lock down is nonsense, idiotic and crap. However, this is easily fixed... Simply, don't buy CoreAVC 1.2! CoreAVC 1.1 is working fine and doing its job. That's good enough for me. Until this lock down disappear, I'll stick with it... and therefore, I don't need to complain.

[Hans Ohlo]

That is why you cannot use it on 800 different machines and OS's
where did i say something like that? i am talking about _one_ mashine, which i surely will update to vista in the near future (i.e. 6months+). but this will be after testing everything. so again why shuoldn't i be able to test the decoder on vista (on the very same mashine, NOT at the same time running!)?

That goes for Windows too before that had activation.
i can change where i install my xp license, i can easily reactivate it on a new mashine. i did it multiple times, so what is your point.

oh and btw. my ms office 2003 license runs on my xp, and guess what... it will install und run without any trouble on vista later on.

[HeadBangeR77]

FFS, what's the big deal here? So they decided to tie you down to one OS install, big f*****g deal. Stop throwing your toys out of the pram and accept this is how most paid-for software will be. Just be glad back in the day that you could move it about as you liked. That goes for Windows too before that had activation.

Betaboy, back me up here will ya? Sounds like an unhappy customer who just doesn't like what he reads! :D

Because there was no EULA nor any general terms and conditions, that would state such facts, in opposite to the most paid-for software you've mentioned. Since such terms and conditions are part of a sales contract, and there were none. One cannot change or impose them after that! If so, the consumer should be informed, and in case of major changes should be able to terminate a conctract, which is not the case here. Read what I've written on the previous page, before you start to swear or call other users "idiots". None of my questions have been answered so far.

Do you really think a company can change its terms and conditions any time it wants to? And publish them in an unofficial way? Do you really think such a form is legal? If so, you either a fanboy or a moron, excuse my hard words.

PS. I don't have any interest in Core AVC nor in any other commercial AVC codec. I haven't got any nor am I planning to buy one, so I consider myself "an observator from the outside".

PS2. I'm still wondering, why nobody has conntacted any consumers protection org ... Since this is not my specialization I will say no more.

[ChronoCross]

if you don't want to accept the EULA at the beginning of the coreavc installer all you have to do is ask for a refund. By accepting it you've agreed to all the stipulations mentioned. Sure it should probably be pre purchase but your not tied to using it a refund is still possible up to the point you accept the EULA

[Inventive Software]

I SERIOUSLY hope I'm not pre-empting anything, but I do actually read all the EULA in each software I install, especially if I'm aware that it needs activation. You have to be so careful what you sign up to, cause they can slide some fairly free clauses in there. Roxio I think had one a year or so ago in their software that stated "you agree to the automatic updating of your software" (don't quote me, unless you find the source, cause that came from my flaky memory, head's like a kitchen thing with holes in it... :D), so actually take the time to read what you agree to and then argue the case. In CoreAVC's case, I do know there was an EULA with the original 1.2 release, however it was decided that the restrictions placed by the MPEG LA were sufficient, as was their activation. And headbanger77: most EULA's have a condition that allows them to change the licensing terms without notification, so meh. ;)



























Of course, you could just read through the entire thread, and the "Official Rant" thread, and note that in the future, it will eventually get released open-source for the good of the community, so all of this is academic now! :D

Jeez, politics! ;)

[HeadBangeR77]

(...)

Of course, you could just read through the entire thread, and the "Official Rant" thread, and note that in the future, it will eventually get released open-source for the good of the community, so all of this is academic now! :D

Jeez, politics! ;)
First of all, I must apologize for my strong words, especially since I don't know the whole background :o (and you sounded like one of those fanboys :D).

Secondly, many of those guys claim there was absolutely no EULA - I'm just wondering, what would happen, if I bought that product while staying in Germany, or UK, or Poland, where more strict rules are applied in favour of consumers' protection. I don't think they would allow things like "features about to change without further notice", especially when those theoretical features were important or costly. ;)

peace, mate ;)

[Inventive Software]

Secondly, many of those guys claim there was absolutely no EULA - I'm just wondering, what would happen, if I bought that product while staying in Germany, or UK, or Poland, where more strict rules are applied in favour of consumers' protection. I don't think they would allow things like "features about to change without further notice", especially when those theoretical features were important or costly. ;)

If you're that pissed about people's right to fair software, you're fighting a losing battle. At least the EU is on our side, sort of, by stifling the monopolies that companies hold, such as Microsoft.

[HeadBangeR77]

If you're that pissed about people's right to fair software, you're fighting a losing battle. At least the EU is on our side, sort of, by stifling the monopolies that companies hold, such as Microsoft.
I know, I've been following the discussion both in the EC/EU as well as in the USA (provided I had enough time). Still, someone must try at least, unless we all want to be united under the name of Umbrella Corporation (tip: Resident Evil ;)).

Btw. it's not only software, GTCs change in many important markets "without notice". I don't expect to inform all the users of any single detail that has been changed, pure absurd that would be. Yet, there are some of such an importance, that should be officialy published before they start to oblige, and the user should have the right to terminate a contract in the chosen, strictly described cases.

"Our side" - sounds funny to me :D
Does everyone has to be on someone's side? gosh ...

[Foreigner999]

If you're that pissed about people's right to fair software, you're fighting a losing battle. At least the EU is on our side, sort of, by stifling the monopolies that companies hold, such as Microsoft.

Gee, Iventive Software you make getting shafted sound like a good thing :p (just kidding)

I think we should complain if we don't like getting the short end of the stick. Besides, in economies the theory is that we give money to recieve a service of equal value. By the sentiment you share would it be better to accept it without discourse?

@ betaboy there are still plenty of unanswered questions just above these posts. Please give your paying customers the courtesy of actually answering or at least direct us to your PR department/spokesperson.

[BetaBoy]

@betaboy

Is GPU support ready for the next release? I wanted to ask if Nvidia/ATI or Intel/AMD or whomever is helping you had asked you to sign an NDA, why would they help you when they have a product themselves that they sell for hardware acceleration? I might be completely misunderstanding.

With the GPU support acceleration, will that be propreitary technology of that company or is it like a GPGPU implementation running an advanced CoreCodec propreitary implementation?

And if your NDA keeps you from touching that one....will your encoder use the GPU to accelerate Encoding in a future product? What about that thread i saw you post about secondary licenses (http://www.corecodec.com/forum/index.php?topic=3728.0) at a discounted rate? When will that be released to the masses? I can live with cheap throw away licenses and am willing to stay on board the titanic as long as the plans are flexible.:devil:

Is there anyway to sign up for the corecodec account system without having to install v1.2?


- GPU is not in this release as I had stated... and there really is way too much for me say that I cannot. Just know that it is coming. Also, since its public info... GPU uses API hooks in the OS that is supplied from MS. So that should answer your question...

On purchasing... in late April we are adding the feature to login to your Core Account and purchase additional products at a discount.

On creating an account.... once we launch the new CoreCodec.com and our forums yes.... as all the sites and account system share a 'unified' login.

[Hans Ohlo]

nice avoiding the answers betaboy... very nice!

if there is a free way to contact customers support please anyone tell me (i do not have the resources to sue anyone :( sadly in this case!), i will go the extra mile and try to bring this customer scam down!

[ChronoCross]

nice avoiding the answers betaboy... very nice!

if there is a free way to contact customers support please anyone tell me (i do not have the resources to sue anyone :( sadly in this case!), i will go the extra mile and try to bring this customer scam down!

apparently you didn't read:

1) It's tied to the OS (he answered that about 10 pages back)
2) because it's a single OS license.
3) They are working on a method for deactivation and activation on a new machine.


You can contact support@corecodec.com

[KoD]

GPU uses API hooks in the OS that is supplied from MS

DXVA 2.0 ? That would make it available only for Vista, I guess. More stormy waters ahead, euh...

[bond]

hm guys, can we get back on the topic please. for ranting and other non technical stuff please use appropriate threads, like the ranting thread (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775)

thx!

[har-vas]

Hello all. I would like to ask if CoreAVC (I bought and installed 1.2 pro) includes in its plans to supply in a future version some color and picture-related settings in the configuration panel. I don't know if this happens to me only, but the playback is very (or anyway much) dark. In general, I think that this feature is essential in any decoder's panel and for example DivX and XviD both do have it. So, why not in CoreAVC? Attention: I am not talking about a player's capability to increase brightness, but I need this feature in the filter itself, so that the playback will be bright enough WHATEVER player I select to watch my movie. Now I have to enforce ffdshow to decode H264, because it has "picture properties" settings where I am increasing brightness. But I prefer CoreAVC because it is faster (I use an older system for playback). Thanks.

[JohnnyFu]

Hi,

Betaboy, will there be a Linux Version of CoreAVC in the future ?

I'm sure this has already been asked and answered somewhere, but i don't wanna search 129 pages.

[BetaBoy]

Hi,

Betaboy, will there be a Linux Version of CoreAVC in the future ?

I'm sure this has already been asked and answered somewhere, but i don't wanna search 129 pages.
CoreAVC already works on Linux (and OS X) the question is playback. Let me explain further without going too off-topic.

I may or may have not mentioned everything in this thread.... but later this year we have to major efforts for Linux as we will be releasing our decoder library bundle for Linux that will feature all of our decoders... CoreAAC, CoreMP3, CoreASP, CoreAVC, CoreWMA, CoreWMV, CoreVC1, CoreDVD, CoreAC3.

Now I do not want to get to OT in this thread.... but i'll post more on it when the time is right as we will have some partnership announcements in regards to this effort as well.

[BetaBoy]

A quick update.... we are working on a reported issue with the current installer for 1.2.5 . . . Hence the delay.... The issue is Vista and how is treats everything as a virus.... it reminds me of this new switch ad.... http://images.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/apple-getamac-security_480x376.mov

Anyway... we have fixed a reported bug that microsoft sent to us and and working on the new 'mucho-mega' installer...

Since I've received 5 PM's on it... yes... as reported... as of Joost 0.7.4 it now features an CoreAVC Professional integrated into it, see; http://www.slevi.net/2007/02/08/joost-074-i-salute-you/

[JohnnyFu]

I always wanted to ask you why CoreAVC only runs under my administrator account ?
It peeves me sometimes to run my video-player as administrator, espacially when i lay on my couch and the keyboard is too far away to type in the admin-password.

regards,
Johnny

edit: rant, moved to ranting-thread :D

[Jay Bee]

Here is the current changelog for the next release of CoreAVC.

One bug I don't see mentioned: Non-square pixel encodes are displayed sqaure when AVC streams are in AVI container.

[Seb.26]

One bug I don't see mentioned: Non-square pixel encodes are displayed sqaure when AVC streams are in AVI container.
AVI container provide DAR and PAR ?! :confused:

[Jay Bee]

AVI container provide DAR and PAR ?! :confused:

No, the data is in the stream, not the container. FFDShow does it right.

[Seb.26]

No, the data is in the stream, not the container. FFDShow does it right.
Oh ... thanks ... :)

[BetaBoy]

One bug I don't see mentioned: Non-square pixel encodes are displayed sqaure when AVC streams are in AVI container.


You have an example video to send me? betaboy AT corecodec DOT com

thx

[Jay Bee]

Sent. :)

[anisota]

I've been having some problems playing PAFF streams with CoreAVC Pro, and was wondering if anyone has seen anything similar. It plays fine with CoreAVC 1.0, but 1.1.0.5 and 1.2 just show a black screen when I build the graph in graphedit (the garph builds fine). I had a lot of trouble getting a sample to play in graphedit, so the one below has some artifacts, but demonstrates the problem. Plays properly with 1.0, not with 1.1 or 1.2

http://www.zshare.net/download/paff-mkv.html

It is annoying because 1.2 is about 10% faster at decoding than 1.0, and I can use the extra little bit of performance, as I'm right on the edge with my hardware.

Any ideas what is wrong?

[Inventive Software]

:search: CoreAVC AFAIK doesn't support PAFF streams at the moment.

[bob0r]

http://coreavc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=4&id=15

- Interlaced support (PAFF and MBAFF)

[anisota]

I have a few PAFF streams that work fine with CoreAVC1.2 and several MBAFF ones that do as well, and as noted above, the CoreAVC site says it is supported.

By the way, there was a question above about linux support. I have recently posted an updated mplayer patch (to the mplayer-dev list) that adds support for all released versions of CoreAVC (you do need to install in Windows and copy the filter along with the relevant registry keys of course...installation in Wine will not work). It works fine on both win32 mplayer and linux, with similar performance to windows (it is hard for me to really compare apples to apples here).
It is a reasonable stop-gap solution until a library is available for linux.

[pankov]

HI
Has anybody tried setting the output color space to RGB32? I want to use it because there are problems with the color range in YUV modes on NVidia cards (16-235 instead of 0-255). The reason I need this is because the Fix VMR9 color range is not working when DirectVobSub (or any other postprocessing) is used.
When I tried to set this color-space in CoreAVC's properties page I noticed the following problem:
the picture get's flipped upside-down

Why is that? ffdshow for example doesn't have this problem.

If needed I can provide a sample

[Seb.26]

HI
Has anybody tried setting the output color space to RGB32? I want to use it because there are problems with the color range in YUV modes on NVidia cards (16-235 instead of 0-255). The reason I need this is because the Fix VMR9 color range is not working when DirectVobSub (or any other postprocessing) is used.
When I tried to set this color-space in CoreAVC's properties page I noticed the following problem:
the picture get's flipped upside-down

Why is that? ffdshow for example doesn't have this problem.

If needed I can provide a sample
Use FFDShow's "Level" filter ... it's far better ... :sly:

[pankov]

Use FFDShow's "Level" filter ... it's far better ... :sly:
10x
I'll it, but can you give a me a quick guide and recommendations what's the better configuration that I should use?

[Seb.26]

10x
I'll it, but can you give a me a quick guide and recommendations what's the better configuration that I should use?
Basic setting for TV->PC is [16;235]->[0;255] ... but be sure your render don't do this too ... test this with THX optimizer for exemple ... ;)

NB: with [16;235]->[0;255], you remove all BTB & WTW values ... but you can restore them by tweaking input levels ... IMO, that's why FFDShow's LEVEL filter is far better than others ... :sly:

[eLupus]

BetaBoy:

Could you consider dropping PECompact2 compression of the dll's exported function table?

I finally got CoreAVC to work in xbmc on xbox for all versions up to 1.1.0.x. Starting with 1.2.0.0 you apperently decided to enable Export Table compression in PECompact2. This apperently leavas the directory entry for the export table blank in the file header, I suppose it could be filled in on dll process attach, however it wasn't when I checked. That it wasn't filled could potentially be caused by PECompact2 thinking I was debugging the dll, and thus never finished decompressing, hard to say though.

Given that the older version also was PECompact2:ed, but work fine atleast I know our custom dll loader can put up with most oddities PECompact does with dlls.

On a sidenote, my intention for registration is to have xbmc read a fixed file located outside main xbmc installation, containing the licence keys. Hope that is satisfactory.

/elupus

[anisota]

Given that the older version also was PECompact2:ed, but work fine atleast I know our custom dll loader can put up with most oddities PECompact does with dlls.
I'm not sure how the xbox loader works, but there were only minor changes needed to mplayer's loader to allow using PECompact2 with it, and the changes I made have worked fine through version 1.2. It may not be at all helpful, but I thought xbmc used mplayer as its back end, and the solution I used should have worked fine for you too. There is a patch on the mplayer-dev list:
PATCH [5/12] CoreAVC Decoder support
containing
05pecompact2.patch
This is the isolated set of changes I needed to make for mplayer to support PECompact2.

Edit: I also wrote an app (included in the patch set) to insert the keys into mplayer's registry, so they can be stored per-user with a centrally installed CoreAVC filter.

[BetaBoy]

Guys PM me and i'll talk to you about the xbmc off line.... also on other platforms...

Although I have not really discussed this here.... Next month we will be release 'CoreAVC QT' for OS X and Windows soon afterwards will offer CoreAVC for Linux. I don't want to go into alot of the details or go off topic at this time... but CoreAVC for Linux is a part of our Linux 'suite' of decoders that we will soon be offering. This will eventually include MP3, AAC, AC-3, ASP, AVC, MPEG-2, VC-1, WMA, WMV and more.

There are alot of details I am leaving out on purpose as we are also working with Linux Distros on the plugin/purchase process for the suite.

[eLupus]

BetaBoy: will do.

ansiota:
the issue that I ran into was that our loader couldn't find any exported functions from the dll, nor could i find that the call to dll main had filled in the pointer to the export table in the coff header, thus when mplayer tries to find the entry point for directshow dll's, it was unable to getprocaddress it.

I'm not sure how pecompact2 works in this regard, but i'm assumeing it should correct this on load, i'm suspecting it thinks i'm debuging the dll, and just doesn't finish loading.

but let's keep this out of this thread for now, as it's quite OT, pm me if you have an idea on how to solve it thou.

[maximm]

Hi, can someone please tell me how i can find the CoreAVC settings menu? It wont pop up when i play a movie and i cant find it anywhere.

[Jay Bee]

If you use Zoom Player or MPC you can go to filter properties while playing an AVC file. But I think a tray icon would be a good feature.

[BetaBoy]

To configure the CoreAVC options... goto 'Start > Programs > CoreCodec > CoreAVC Professional' and click 'Configure CoreAVC Professional' (for the Pro version). The CoreAVC configuration panel will then pop-up for you to change the settings.

[BetaBoy]

But I think a tray icon would be a good feature.
We have avoided this because it bothers some people... however there has been alot of people aking for it... so I'll bounce it around again internally... as I like anything that saves multiple 'clicks' ;-)

[Dreassica]

Can't be too hard to just add an option in config to enable a tray icon. If some peopel are bothered by a tray icon, they can just leave it disabled.

[BetaBoy]

Can't be too hard to just add an option in config to enable a tray icon. If some peopel are bothered by a tray icon, they can just leave it disabled.


A tray icon is cake work... and I like the ability to turn it off in the options... the same will be true for our upcoming corner icon overlay.

[Hans Ohlo]

betaboy, any news on 1.2.5? you said it was due to be released around 30th of january 2007(?)...

[Ice =A=]

I just wanted to reinstall CoreAVC 1.2 and it won't work. I'm getting an error message "Unable to obtain serial number from remote server".
Actually that's what I was afraid of the first time I heared of that online activation! I really like coreavc and paid for it gladly, but if I pay for it I'd like to really have it, whenever I want!

Edit: Seems to work again...

[BetaBoy]

We have delayed the release because of the Vista RTM issues we had to deal with that were not present in the RC's. Aside from that it has given us the opportunity to add alot to the installer including the in-demand 'offline activation'. While you will still need to get to a PC to get an activation code.... it is still an option to activate an offline device or if a firewall is preventing you from registering.

[Inventive Software]

What did MS break in Vista RTM that wasn't in the RC's eh? :D

[Ice =A=]

including the in-demand 'offline activation'. Hey, that sounds great! I wouldn't have thought you'd ever change that again... :)
So there is someone who does listen to his customers... ;)
Keep up the good work!

[BetaBoy]

Last night we released a Vista compatible installer for v1.2... however because of the Vista mods it still does need some work on XP (go figure).

So v1.2.5 is now going to be v1.3 because of all the work that has gone into this release we felt that the 1.3 milestone was more then appropriate. We are still targeting this week for 1.3 with the new installer, offline activation and all the bug fixes... and from our beta testers and OEM partners... it looks as if v1.3 is the fastest, most stable, and bug free version to date.

Thanx for everyone's great feedback and continued support.

[Sgt_Strider]

Hi guys, I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but is CoreAVC just a decoder right now? Or a encoder also exist?

[acidsex]

wow, another delay. who would have expected it?

[Inventive Software]

Hey, at least they're (sort of) honest about the cause of delays, and it won't be a lengthy one! :D

[Mangix]

Hi guys, I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but is CoreAVC just a decoder right now? Or a encoder also exist?
just a decoder. but i belive that an encoder is currently in the works...

[Roscoe62]

Hiya Betaboy,

I would like to repeat Har Vas' question from page 129 as I am also interested in seeing CoreAVC integrate some kind of picture controls specific to the decoder. I am also seeing a slightly darker than desirable picture and would love to see some way of customising that in the future. Apart from that I'm very much enjoying how CoreAVC is working.

Any response is appreciated.

[Dirhael]

Just wondering if someone here would be able to answer me regarding a installation problem I'm having with CoreAVC on WinVista. I wouldn't normally ask this here but seeing as CoreCodec's support can't seem to bother responding to my support ticket (been waiting 3 days now), I thought that perhaps someone had run into similar issues.

The thing is, I just can't seem to install it on Vista, no matter how hard I try. I realize that it isn't really supported on Vista until 1.3 but the error message I'm getting is that the installer is out of date or have been tampered with. I've tried re-downloading, running in compatibility mode etc., but always with the same result. Mostly I just wanted to know if this error was related to Vista or if there was some other problem.

[KoD]

I think the answer is simply: it will refuse to install on Vista.

[Dirhael]

I think the answer is simply: it will refuse to install on Vista.

Thank you very much, that's sorta the answer I was looking for :) I was worried that there was some other cause of my problems, not the least because of the fact that the installer doesn't seem to handle non-US registration names to well (the letter "Ø" becomes "Ã" for instance, and I thought that this very well could be one reason I was getting the error). I would have attempted to install it on XP if not for the fact that the copy protection scheme in CoreAVC is rather restrictive.

Here's hoping for some better, more informational error messages for the next release :)

[Guest]

Why can't I purchase and download CoreAVC? There doesn't seem to be any way to actually get it off their web page. :(

You'd think a company would provide a way for people to purchase their product, wouldn't you?

[bob0r]

For ranting: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=118775

However i do agree, once you have a login/pass you should be able to download CoreAVC as many as you like..... the good ioftpd days.... ioftpd now sucks, its opensource! I dont even have to pay for it, where is the fun in that?

[BetaBoy]

neuron2.... Nicole emailed you explaining everything. Prior to this weekend's release we had found additional bug(s) with the decoder and installer that needed to be fixed and warranted the delay.

[Guest]

Thank you for the clarification. Can you please explain the "fundamental changes in the registration process" that she referred to?

[Hans Ohlo]

neuron2.... Nicole emailed you explaining everything. Prior to this weekend's release we had found additional bug(s) with the decoder and installer that needed to be fixed and warranted the delay.
if you just would release the decoder i/we could finally use it again. you could release minor updates more often so that users won't have to wait half a year for really anoying bugs to be fixed. and every software has bugs and for all eternety will have bugs, so do we see another coreavc release?

[gmcinema]

if you just would release the decoder i/we could finally use it again. you could release minor updates more often so that users won't have to wait half a year for really anoying bugs to be fixed. and every software has bugs and for all eternety will have bugs, so do we see another coreavc release?

At the moment they take your money and give you nothing in exchange!!! It cannot get worse can it .......

[bob0r]

At the moment they take your money and give you nothing in exchange!!! It cannot get worse can it .......

Good thing they haven't done that to me, i would have given them a lot, truely a lot of free data! :rolleyes:

If i was you id msg betaboy.

Post where you all contacted them in the ranting thread... then if they don't reply, let us know (be sure to contact them in different ways... as in from another email for example)

[gmcinema]

If i was you id msg betaboy.

I sure did but have had no reply. Only some "we are trying to do soemthing for you" form a Nicole@Core after a week. No ETA for a working product.

[Hans Ohlo]

now after the blabla about releasing a new version and how we all can upgrate free to a vista license (how idiotic is this sounding for a decoder!), i had written a mail to betaboy two weeks ago because i updated to vista on my media center pc. i just wanted to get my license reset to be able to use the said 1.2 vista installer... no take a guess!

NOTHING.

[ChronoCross]

hmm I believe your still in the wrong thread hans.

[saratoga]

The CoreAVC site should be updated with more recent benchmarks. All they have now are links to reviews using old versions of their software. It'd be nice to know if the newer ones are getting faster or not :)

[JohnnyFu]

So the 1.2.5 release is chanceld and the next version is 1.3 ?
Any news regarding DXVA in 1.3, Betaboy ?

[Hans Ohlo]

Any news regarding DXVA in 1.3, Betaboy ?
hehe, any news on anything would be nice currently...

[gmcinema]

hehe, any news on anything would be nice currently...
Well the news is: they wiped my account! I can't even check my Ticket or indeed check if I can finally get a working code for my money they took!!!! Unbelievable.:mad:

[BetaBoy]

Wiped your account? Never, anyone that submits a ticket can login and check the status... we are now closer then we have ever been to releasing 1.3

gmcinema... PM me and i'll look into your issue.

[gmcinema]

Wiped your account? Never, anyone that submits a ticket can login and check the status... we are now closer then we have ever been to releasing 1.3

gmcinema... PM me and i'll look into your issue.

PM is on it's way!
As I stated already I cannot logon to my account anymore.
I just get the message: Invalid Username or Password.
Ticket ID was: BPV-487304 and I am denied a login!

[ChronoCross]

psss.....it's been released.....check your core account. the download link will download 1.3

[BetaBoy]

A soft release... but yeah its there... after the weekend we will include the offline activation in the installer once we are sure there the current 1.3 users have no issues.

[DeepBeepMeep]

I have just downloaded it ! The installer seems to work better and tells what it is about to do, which is nicer.

However, the color space issue has only been fixed partially: without even using the new option "Convert TV scale to PC Scale" the black level has been corrected for some movies.

Unfortunately, for other movies the option needs to be set and not to really get PC levels but to turn 30 blacks into 16 blacks. Therefore to view all the movies one needs to have multiple CoreaAVC settings which is not convenient.

Please Betaboy before you make the official announcement for 1.3, fix this bug. It would be a real shame to have to wait more months to have a fix for this bug reported since the 1.1 release.

Note that I have this issue whether I add ffdshow in the graph.

- Sample 1: incorrect black level in 1.2 and fixed in 1.3
http://www.sendspace.com/file/hbko4f


- Sample 2: incorrect black level in 1.2 and 1.3 and needs the option "Convert TV scale to PC". In fact the end result is not PC level since the black is at 16.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/29qhci

[JohnnyFu]

Can't find the download link. When i klick on "Products" i get a long error message wich ends with:

Fatal error: Call to a member function Move() on a non-object in /home/groups/portal/htdocs/include/database/PearDatabase.php on line 442


Edit: just wrote a ticket, but i can't add a screenshot

error code:
Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/groups/portal/htdocs/include/utils/CommonUtils.php on line 2179

Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/groups/portal/htdocs/include/utils/CommonUtils.php on line 2196

Warning: move_uploaded_file(storage/2007/March/week3/21736_coreforge_error.png) [function.move-uploaded-file]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/groups/portal/htdocs/modules/uploads/add2db.php on line 43

Warning: move_uploaded_file() [function.move-uploaded-file]: Unable to move '/home/groups/portal/tmp/phpRxYQPu' to 'storage/2007/March/week3/21736_coreforge_error.png' in

[ACrowley]

Can't find the download link. When i klick on "Products" i get a long error message wich ends with:

Fatal error: Call to a member function Move() on a non-object in /home/groups/portal/htdocs/include/database/PearDatabase.php on line 442

i have no Email with downloadlink as like as with 1.2

But i just login into my Account on teh CoreCodec Site and the download starts.
1.3 Works fine , no Problems so far

I couldnt install Version 1.2 anymore after i change my OS, but 1.3 seems to be reactivated ,nice

[JohnnyFu]

Ok, i have found the download link. But the mentioned error above still appears. However, the installer runs fine.

- No E-Mail notification about the release
- No DXVA

[travisbell]

Nice! I was able to re-activate my copy as well! Finally, I can use a product I bought! WHOOO!

Nice work guys.

[bakerpr]

Could you please direct me to the download link in core account because it must be hidden or am I blind?

[Jay Bee]

Gave it a quick try with the files I had previously had problems with.

good:
-interlaced x264 works now
-directshow deinterlacing works without graphical errors now
-aspect ratio with streams inside AVI works now

bad:
-elecard MBAFF still doesn't work
-playback of AVC in AVI is completely garbled

So playback of only one of the three sample files I sent to CoreAVC were fixed in this version and one was broken. I've uploaded them here (http://rapidshare.com/files/21653026/clips.rar.html) for reference.

It would be nice if these issues could be fixed before 1.3 is released properly. Especially the borked AVI playback is a showstopper that would force me to stop using CoreAVC.

But anyway, thx for the other fixes.

Could you please direct me to the download link in core account because it must be hidden or am I blind?

it's well hidden: click sales, click purchases, click on order#, click on download.

[bakerpr]

Thanks found it !

[ChronoCross]

I still don't know why anyone would put AVC in AVI.

[GmorG McRoth]

Because it's possible I guess. Maybe not proper or efficient but people tend to make weird things all the time.

[BetaBoy]

JohnnyFu.... its a 'soft release' hence no email notifications yet... as I mentioned till after the weekend...

The 'Products' link is broke and we are working with vtiger on this known bug to fix it.

[ChronoCross]

I'd like to add this is definitely the fastest version.

[BetaBoy]

Gave it a quick try with the files I had previously had problems with.

good:
-interlaced x264 works now
-directshow deinterlacing works without graphical errors now
-aspect ratio with streams inside AVI works now

bad:
-elecard MBAFF still doesn't work
-playback of AVC in AVI is completely garbled

So playback of only one of the three sample files I sent to CoreAVC were fixed in this version and one was broken. I've uploaded them here (http://rapidshare.com/files/21653026/clips.rar.html) for reference.

It would be nice if these issues could be fixed before 1.3 is released properly. Especially the borked AVI playback is a showstopper that would force me to stop using CoreAVC.

But anyway, thx for the other fixes.



it's well hidden: click sales, click purchases, click on order#, click on download.

Jay Bee... thx we are looking into the AVI issue with your sample.

[BetaBoy]

Jay Bee... AVI issue fixed... On Elecard... The stream contains Picture Timing SEI messages with pic_struct set to 0. This explicitly tells the decoder that the picture must be displayed as a progressive frame. So.. the stream says its progressive, and is displayed as progressive (but its not)... we would guess that an 'interlaced' option was not checked when encoding it.

We will post the update tomorrow in your core account.... you'll need to download the installer again. Thx again for the report.

[Jay Bee]

Fastest bugfix ever! Thx. And if the other problem is elecards fault not CoreAVC's then that means that CoreAVC is now a very complete and high performance decoder. Grats!

[DeepBeepMeep]

Betaboy, any chance that something can be done regarding the color space issue which is still unresolved? Thanks in advance for not having us wait a couple more months.

Given the number of times I (and others) have mentioned it in this thread, I am starting to wonder if it is clear to you. The two samples I gave in my previous post should be quite explicit.

[gmcinema]

Does not decode BBC-HD trial using Terratec Cinergy 2400i DT.
Same setup with Cyberlink H.264/AVC decoder works.

[bakerpr]

I also have problems with 1.3 and all h264 broadcasts using technotrend S3200 and dvbviewer. No problems with previous versions.

[Jay Bee]

Does not decode BBC-HD trial using Terratec Cinergy 2400i DT.
Same setup with Cyberlink H.264/AVC decoder works.

Actually most of the HDTV samples located here (http://x264.nl/h.264.samples/) don't work but since the corruption looks similar to the avi problem I mentioned earlier I was going to wait for the fixed version before mentioning it here.

[lucassp]

Actually most of the HDTV samples located here (http://x264.nl/h.264.samples/) don't work but since the corruption looks similar to the avi problem I mentioned earlier I was going to wait for the fixed version before mentioning it here.

well...I can play them using CoreAVC!

[Jay Bee]

v1.3?

[MacGyver2k]

pro7.hd / premiere.hd doesn't work for me either in dvbviewer.
messed up picture with thick flickering lines instead of a picture. coreavc 1.2.0.0 worked fine and cyberlink codec does too, but maybe it is a dvbviewer bug :)

when i switch to "luxe.tv hd" and then back to pro7.hd or premiere.hd has a picture. the aspect ratio is kinda messed and on the right side about a third of the picture is missing.

but the installer worked fine under vista, and all recored videos are working perfect.

[BetaBoy]

Actually most of the HDTV samples located here (http://x264.nl/h.264.samples/) don't work but since the corruption looks similar to the avi problem I mentioned earlier I was going to wait for the fixed version before mentioning it here.

We are looking into these samples.

[ChronoCross]

I tried out those samples using WMP and MPC and they play fine. I would imagine this is a DVBViewer incompatibility with coreavc and not coreavc itself.

[saratoga]

Anyone tried benchmarking it? I'm curious if anything new is going to be come playable on my slowish dual core system.

[ChronoCross]

I can play mbaff 1080 stuff on my single core. your dual core should be more than worth of playing pretty much everything

[Pomyk]

Version 1.3 standard doesnt work for me.
I get "A dynamic link library (DLL) initialization routine failed" error when i try to run coreavc config.
I'm on windows XP.

[Jay Bee]

I tried out those samples using WMP and MPC and they play fine. I would imagine this is a DVBViewer incompatibility with coreavc and not coreavc itself.

Argh, you made me waste another hour of my life taking a closer look at those samples. :)

What I quickly found out is that the decoding problems only occur when using HDTVPump instead of Haali. Yet Haali Splitter causes problems of its own: With the samples that have MP2 audio it signals the sub-type on the audio pin as {00000055-0000-0010-8000-00AA00389B71}. This is the same sub-type that is used by MP3. Depending which player you are using and which audio decoders you have installed this can cause playback to freeze. MPC can deal with it, WMP can deal with it if the right codecs are installed and ZP can only deal with it by setting up some advanced filter rules.

While I was at it I also checked the deinterlacing on those samples. The only file that didn't deinterlace although it clearly contains interlaced content was "anixe.hd.ts" while the 5 other files that are true interlaced all worked fine. So I'm guessing that's not CoreAVC's fault so overall interlaced playback works great with 1.3.

[oddball]

What new 'features' does 1.3 have? GPU support? If not I'll pass and continue using the much better (and free) ffdshow even though I am registered for the free upgrade. Burned once. Never again.

[BetaBoy]

What new 'features' does 1.3 have? GPU support? If not I'll pass and continue using the much better (and free) ffdshow even though I am registered for the free upgrade. Burned once. Never again.

oddball... not to get into the tit-for-tat... but i'd be interested in specifics of what your opinion is that determines 'better'. Like faster? More options? You can PM it to me if you don't wanna go to OT in the thread.

On GPU.... not to the public yet.

[wiak]

-playback of AVC in AVI is completely garbled

that should be garbage by default, also avi is a crappy old container that never was made for h264, REMUX it at once!
:helpful:

[BetaBoy]

For you all... Also we are going to be doing a new CoreAVC release tomorrow for 1.3.0.1 as we have found a serious bug in 1.3 (thanx for the reports everyone!)

[mrkazador]

There still is an issue with coreavc creating artifacts with encodes.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=945658#post945658
Im not sure if this will be fixed........

[BetaBoy]

If you have a sample video PM me and i'll give you a dropbox to upload the video to so we can look at it.

[mrkazador]

If you have a sample video PM me and i'll give you a dropbox to upload the video to so we can look at it.
Pm sent

Anyone want to do their own testing, you can download this sample clip.
http://rs38.rapidshare.com/files/21985628/Doom9.rar
Notice the person on the left @ 00:05, his collar shows some serious artifacts. Again at 00:10....
This also happens with cyberlinks decoder but NOT with ffdshow.

[Jay Bee]

that should be garbage by default, also avi is a crappy old container that never was made for h264, REMUX it at once!
:helpful:

Hehe, why can't doom9 people attach their emotional support to football teams or racing drivers or something, like normal people. Believe me it's more fun than being a container format fanboi (or basher). :)

For you all... Also we are going to be doing a new CoreAVC release tomorrow for 1.3.0.1 as we have found a serious bug in 1.3 (thanx for the reports everyone!)

Is there a way to tell from the download page if the available download is a new version or not?

[BetaBoy]

Jay Bee .... i'll add a custom field for version/date there so you can see the difference.

[Maxiuca]

BetaBoy, can you finally reveal what is new in 1.3? Cause all we can get from you that there is a new version out, like renumbering the version was itself a priority. But what is new? When there's gonna be GPU support?

[_xxl]

Do we really need DXVA?CoreAVC is multithreaded and working ok with H.264 HD-DVD on X2.

[ToS_Maverick]

i can barely play 1080p files on my laptop, with DXVA, i think, it would be possible!

[Theliel]

ppl read somethings?

betaboy: On GPU.... not to the public yet.

so GPU support will be release when are will be ready.

needed??? well, nothing in this world are needed, but have hardware support for h264 decoder are very nice feature. In this moment, for example, I use Cyberlink H264/AVC decoder because its the only one decoder with Hard support that work for me. If CoreAVC add hard support too, I sure this help to much ppl.

less CPU load more ppl can play 1080p h264 or more sofisticated decoder can be build ;)

[AKarpo]

ppl read somethings?

betaboy: On GPU.... not to the public yet.

so GPU support will be release when are will be ready.

needed??? well, nothing in this world are needed, but have hardware support for h264 decoder are very nice feature. In this moment, for example, I use Cyberlink H264/AVC decoder because its the only one decoder with Hard support that work for me. If CoreAVC add hard support too, I sure this help to much ppl.

less CPU load more ppl can play 1080p h264 or more sofisticated decoder can be build ;)

Question, how do you use Cyberlink's H264 codec properly to have hardware accelerated .mkv playback? I'm using Media Player Classic, and I can't figure it out. One thing I am worried about is that my old 6800GT won't support MPEG-4 accelerated playback (Purevideo says 6800GT AGP's will not do accelerated MPEG-4), but maybe it will work if it's done solely through DXVA? Feel free to pm me so we don't get yelled at for hijacking the thread.

Anyways, despite the gnashing of teeth of many users on this forum, I very much like CoreAVC and can't wait for GPU support to put my newly purchased 8800GTS to work. All those transistors doing hardware accelerated 1080p...Be still my beating heart!

One last note, BetaBoy, any ETA for 1.3.0.1 dropping sometime soon?

[_xxl]

How do you enable DXVA for ASUS 7900 TOP?

[foxyshadis]

(Purevideo says 6800GT AGP's will not do accelerated MPEG-4)

That's right, that card's hardware is just plain broken, not something that can be worked around in software. There are hacked drivers somewhere that turn DXVA on for it, and it just returns garbage. It was the very first 6-series card, first attempt at purevideo, and they blew it, sorry.

[Theliel]

this is offtopic, I send us now a PM to both :)

[dentdiz81]

'less CPU load more ppl can play 1080p h264 or more sofisticated decoder can be build '

If there was a way to get core avc to work with mplayer (in windows and linux) 1080p would be a breeze for virtually all computers because it is so lightweight. It is not so much the codec but the players they are used in.

Hey betaboy, if you how to make this possible, or know of a player as light as mplayer, let me know. Hopefully someone has cracked it.

By the way i have tried TCMP, kmplayer,bsplayer etc .

[mrkazador]

'less CPU load more ppl can play 1080p h264 or more sofisticated decoder can be build '

If there was a way to get core avc to work with mplayer (in windows and linux) 1080p would be a breeze for virtually all computers because it is so lightweight. It is not so much the codec but the players they are used in.

Have you tried Zoom Player Pro? A combination of codecs should allow for perfect playback. I dont think mplayer is any different than any other media player like zoom player. Unless you can prove me wrong....

[SealTooGreat]

^MPlayer is different 'cause it use its own codecs by default, but you can force it to use DirectShow for example.

[nm]

If there was a way to get core avc to work with mplayer (in windows and linux) 1080p would be a breeze for virtually all computers because it is so lightweight. It is not so much the codec but the players they are used in.
CoreAVC (at least up to 1.2) is supported in the latest MPlayer SVN revisions. See: http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/mplayer-dev-eng/2007-February/049188.html

I dont think mplayer is any different than any other media player like zoom player. Unless you can prove me wrong....
MPlayer and VLC are not DirectShow-based players, so they don't play by the same rules. They can't directly use DShow codecs installed on the system, but on the other hand they tend to be a bit faster than other players with their built-in set of codecs. MPlayer (and VLC on Linux) also implement a portion of DirectShow and Win32 API to support binary codecs. However, this support is not perfect, so most new codecs require some tuning and coding before they can be used.

[Hans Ohlo]

proof: (bsg 1080paff stream)

coreAVC 1.3 (same result with 1.2 but with fixed color bug)
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/8586/coreavcfuckuppaffed2.png
ffdshow:
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/5677/ffdshowfinesy0.png

look at the fonts...


i found this surfing some hdtv sites. the caps are from skyoneHD broadcasts of battlestar galactica which are 1080 paff streams. the screenshots clearly show that coreAVC still has big issues correctly decoding some streams. this kind of stream was it that showed the known color levels bug.

so i again ask myself what is happening to coreAVC, is it still the prime product of coreCodec or did they move on to something else?

[AKarpo]

i found this surfing some hdtv sites. the caps are from skyoneHD broadcasts of battlestar galactica which are 1080 paff streams. the screenshots clearly show that coreAVC still has big issues correctly decoding some streams. this kind of stream was it that showed the known color levels bug.

so i again ask myself what is happening to coreAVC, is it still the prime product of coreCodec or did they move on to something else?

Dude, chill out. They're working on it. If you don't like the product, don't buy it. I've seen you harassing CoreAVC on this thread for like three posts now. We get it.

I'm sure if you were to provide the material to Betaboy so that they may fix it in the next version, they would be more than willing to take a look at it.

[ChronoCross]

is there any particular point you post in this thread hans ohlo? I mean all you do is whine and moan. If you don't like coreavc then go use ffdshow.

[saratoga]

i found this surfing some hdtv sites. the caps are from skyoneHD broadcasts of battlestar galactica which are 1080 paff streams. the screenshots clearly show that coreAVC still has big issues correctly decoding some streams. this kind of stream was it that showed the known color levels bug.

so i again ask myself what is happening to coreAVC, is it still the prime product of coreCodec or did they move on to something else?

Are you sure thats not due to different frames being used? Its pretty clear the one image is a good couple frames off from the other. The text may not actually be the same in the source, particularly if it was ripped from a lower bitrate MPEG2 source.

[bob0r]

Don't use the initial 1.3 release if you want to play:

H.264 display in dvbviewer = fucked (capturing works)
H.264 in .m2ts = fucked
H.264 in .EVO = fucked

Its a good thing they let us "beta test" first, before releasing to the masses :rolleyes:

(Btw, all those options work fine in 1.2, the only thing required for dvbviewer is the crop 1088 to 1080 option, which hides all the mess from the broadcasters)

[mikeyakame]

1.3 is still producing heavy artifacts/blocking trails on black blocks, where as cyberlink/ffdshow are producing clean outputs, only seems to happen on very high bitrate 1080p encodes, video bitrate avg for this is 10217kbps. would you like a sample?

[bob0r]

Samples are always good.

[BetaBoy]

There still is an issue with coreavc creating artifacts with encodes.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=945658#post945658
Im not sure if this will be fixed........

Got your samples.... we are not seeing the artifacts you are seeing... the only to note is that we did see some blockiness on the door.

[BetaBoy]

Samples are always good.

I agree... samples please. Thx

[BetaBoy]

'less CPU load more ppl can play 1080p h264 or more sofisticated decoder can be build '

If there was a way to get core avc to work with mplayer (in windows and linux) 1080p would be a breeze for virtually all computers because it is so lightweight. It is not so much the codec but the players they are used in.

Hey betaboy, if you how to make this possible, or know of a player as light as mplayer, let me know. Hopefully someone has cracked it.

By the way i have tried TCMP, kmplayer,bsplayer etc .
Both CorePlayer Pro and BetaPlayer for Linux will be out by the end of the year.

[mrkazador]

Got your samples.... we are not seeing the artifacts you are seeing... the only to note is that we did see some blockiness on the door.
Wow...Really?
I dont see how it not could be coreavc, FFDSHOW works prefectly fine. Im using Haali Media Splitter, also tried Gabest matroska splitter and same problem.

Im not saying your a liar :devil: but can anyone else confirm that it is fixed? Could be on my end.
More info on the problem here;
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=119187&highlight=coreavc+bug
Sample here;
http://rs38.rapidshare.com/files/21985628/Doom9.rar

[Hans Ohlo]

I mean all you do is whine and moan. If you don't like coreavc then go use ffdshow.
i did not pay for ffdshow. i payed for coreAVC and get only lame excuses and they tell me that everything will be fixed in a release that gets delayed and delayed. then it finally shows up and nothing is fixed (as many here point out).

I'm sure if you were to provide the material to Betaboy so that they may fix it in the next version, they would be more than willing to take a look at it.
if he would react to a pm once i would try to get the sample for the pictures. and i am on it.

Are you sure thats not due to different frames being used? Its pretty clear the one image is a good couple frames off from the other. The text may not actually be the same in the source, particularly if it was ripped from a lower bitrate MPEG2 source.
nope, this is the h264 paff source stream. as i said i will try to get a sample.

BUT how long will it be till this is finally fixed? another 6 or so months?

and yes lately on thins thread i had nothing good to say but thats only because there simply are only bad things around coreAVC lately.

[ChronoCross]

i did not pay for ffdshow. i payed for coreAVC and get only lame excuses and they tell me that everything will be fixed in a release that gets delayed and delayed. then it finally shows up and nothing is fixed (as many here point out).

and yes lately on thins thread i had nothing good to say but thats only because there simply are only bad things around coreAVC lately.

you also haven't provided anything to help fix the problem. You've done a whole lot of complaining that is best meant for the ranting thread. Pictures of the problem don't count as how do you fix a picture.

[Hans Ohlo]

ok then:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7S6FA5K3

lets see how long this will take ;)

[mrkazador]

ok then:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7S6FA5K3

lets see how long this will take ;)

I captured the same frame you posted before. The only problem I see is with "skip all deblocking" you get some kind of blocking/artifacts near the text. With standard deblocking this goes away.
Coreavc with standard deblocking:
http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/104/coreavcstandarddeblockigy4.th.jpg (http://img103.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavcstandarddeblockigy4.jpg)
Coreavc with Skip ALL deblocking:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/2063/coreavcnostandarddeblocea1.th.jpg (http://img240.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavcnostandarddeblocea1.jpg)
Using ffdshow, it produced the exact same image as "standard deblocking"

[Hans Ohlo]

I captured the same frame you posted before. The only problem I see is with "skip all deblocking" you get some kind of blocking/artifacts near the text. With standard deblocking this goes away.
Coreavc with standard deblocking:
http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/104/coreavcstandarddeblockigy4.th.jpg (http://img103.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavcstandarddeblockigy4.jpg)
Coreavc with Skip ALL deblocking:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/2063/coreavcnostandarddeblocea1.th.jpg (http://img240.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavcnostandarddeblocea1.jpg)
Using ffdshow, it produced the exact same image as "standard deblocking"
hi, thanks for checking.

ok i found out the following:
- no deinterlacing, the picture is fine***
- software deinterlacing, the picture looks as in my screenshots

***the colorbug seems to be back, convert TV to PC scale OFF (i have a calibrated output), i checked this with ffdshow behind coreAVC in the filtergraph. the levels are off (not 16-235, more like 32-119). just scaling to PC levels would result in correct TV scales. so color precision is lost completely.

please could someone check my findings.

[mrkazador]

***the colorbug seems to be back, convert TV to PC scale OFF (i have a calibrated output), i checked this with ffdshow behind coreAVC in the filtergraph. the levels are off (not 16-235, more like 32-119). just scaling to PC levels would result in correct TV scales. so color precision is lost completely.

please could someone check my findings.

Your right about this, I had to "check" tv to pc scale. I think betaboy knows about this problem already.

[Hans Ohlo]

Your right about this, I had to "check" tv to pc scale. I think betaboy knows about this problem already.
could you also check if when you use the point software deinterlacing the picture looks as in the first screenshots i quoted?

[DeepBeepMeep]

I have reported the colorspace issue in many occasions (see my two video samples) and didn't get any feedback so far )-:

I don't need to turn on deinterlacing to get the wrong color space with black level at 30. The black level has been fixed for some hd video sources (some stuff coming from PremiereHD have black level at 16 without using the new option).

However, hd video material coming from SkyHD have both incorrect black levels and white levels (black at 30 et white at 226 instead of being respectively at 16 and 240 for TV levels).

The new option at best enlarges slightly the color space but doesn't do what do what its name says. And as I mentioned previously since the issue has been fixed only partially the option needs sometime to be turned on sometime turned off.

Now betaboy has all he needs to fix the issue. It would be good at least to get an official feedback from him to know if his is aware of the issue and working on it...

[mrkazador]

could you also check if when you use the point software deinterlacing the picture looks as in the first screenshots i quoted?

Yep, same thing. Software deinterlacing adds some sort of artifacts in the text, like lines.

[Hans Ohlo]

However, hd video material coming from SkyHD have both incorrect black levels and white levels (black at 30 et white at 226 instead of being respectively at 16 and 240 for TV levels).

The new option at best enlarges slightly the color space but doesn't do what do what its name says. And as I mentioned previously since the issue has been fixed only partially the option needs sometime to be turned on sometime turned off.
actually the source material does not have incorrect levels, coreAVC outputs incorrect levels at these kind of streams.

the TV option is no option for me, because with it color precision is lost. it only stretches the levels...

another thing i noticed... corecAVC ;) and many typos in the properties tab. lets you wonder how high the priority of this project is at corecodec.

Yep, same thing. Software deinterlacing adds some sort of artifacts in the text, like lines.
thanks for confirming... now lets wait a year and see if it will be fixed.

don't understand me wrong, i like coreAVC. it is the only decoder which plays some streams of mine fluently but lately the issues come up and get totally ignored by the devs. i/we payed for the software!

[DeepBeepMeep]

actually the source material does not have incorrect levels, coreAVC outputs incorrect levels at these kind of streams.


Sorry I wasn' t very clear. I meant exactly what you said: colors levels rendered for these streams are incorrect with coreavc whereas they are fine with ffdshow, cyberlink h264 decoder, etc...

[Seb.26]

About the "TV levels bug" ...
If you take a TV level source ( a DVD ie. ) ... them encode it with x264 or same, the levels "in the encoded file" are identical ( encoding doesn't re-map levels ?!! ) ... and them decode this with CoreAvc, levels aren't the same ?!

... In another words : does CoreAvc do a PC->TV level ?! ...

[acidsex]

Has 1.3 been released yet? I havent received my info and no new version is listed under my core account. Is there a cost to upgrade to 1.3?

[Selur]

just download the file in your account again. I did this and when installing the new file it states 1.3 ;)

[acidsex]

Cool, got the file, went to install and it told me it has already been activated. i thought we were supposed to be able to install this on Vista now? Do I have to deactivate my previous license used under XP? Surely Im not expected to purchase a new license for use with Vista when the old license is no longer being used. Any suggestions?

[Haali]

I have reported the colorspace issue in many occasions (see my two video samples) and didn't get any feedback so far )-:

However, hd video material coming from SkyHD have both incorrect black levels and white levels (black at 30 et white at 226 instead of being respectively at 16 and 240 for TV levels).

I've analyzed your two samples, and they both have full range specified in SPS VUI, but are using only 16-235 levels. I think CoreAVC behaves correctly and respects VUI information that says the video is already full range. So when the levels conversion checkbox is on, levels are left as is, and when it's off they are further compressed to TV range, that gives 32-226 for your samples.

The first sample is also complicated because it is a Matroska file renamed to ts, and has VIU info stripped from the SPS stored in Matroska headers, but the stream has more SPS NALs with VUI in place that specify full range. For some time those extra SPS were removed by the splitter, but this won't be done anymore because I now have samples where SPS/PPS does change in the middle of a stream and has to be kept.

[DeepBeepMeep]

Haali, thanks for your explanation.

I have indeed mistakenly sent a sample which indeed came from a mkv file. The ironic thing is that once turned into a mkv file the color levels are good (maybe as you suggested because some info was lost).

The fact that it is a mkv file explains why the colors looked good on one sample and not on the other one. In fact I checked a TS sample from the same broadcaster of the sample that was turned into a mk file and when it is still in its TS form it has also incorrect color levels.

So it seems the "full range" flag is improperly set for two of the major european HD broacasters (SkyHD and PremiereHD). Since I assume most HD content created are stored no matter what using TV levels, it would be very nice if CoreAVC could ignore the flawed flag like it is done by other decoders such as ffdshow and cyberlink.

This could be an option if required. It seems this would fix the issue reported by Han Solo and others. Many thanks from the CoreAVC team if you could do something about it because at the moment it is a bit annoying to have to turn on and off an option to watch a movie.

[Hans Ohlo]

So when the levels conversion checkbox is on, levels are left as is, and when it's off they are further compressed to TV range, that gives 32-226 for your samples.
why do that? a decoder is (at default configuration) supposed to decode what is present in the files. so why compress the colorspace when a conversion flag is _not_ set? even at tv levels form 16-235 there can be blacker-than-black or whiter-than-white levels below 16 oder above 235. why compress these to the standard tv levels. on a properly calibrated ouput such a thing will look totally wrong!

[nk]

I install CoreAVC on Windows Vista Ultimate 32bit.
installing processing seems good, but when I configure,
an error dialog(RunDLL) appears and says initializing routine failed
or so. (Sorry my windows is not english version so, cannot tell exact error message.)

How to fix my problem?

[foxyshadis]

why do that? a decoder is (at default configuration) supposed to decode what is present in the files. so why compress the colorspace when a conversion flag is _not_ set? even at tv levels form 16-235 there can be blacker-than-black or whiter-than-white levels below 16 oder above 235. why compress these to the standard tv levels. on a properly calibrated ouput such a thing will look totally wrong!

Then the fullrange should be off. You're not thinking this through, so you're directing your vemon a Core for properly supporting an MPEG feature; complain to Sky. You might need to grab a hex editor or write a script to switch these VUI entries off.

Here's a table of how this all works, listed by input & output:

fullrange
on off
----+------------
| leave expand
C PC| 0-255 16-235
o | 0-255 0-255
r |contract leave
e TV| 0-255 16-235
| 16-235 16-235

What Core calls "fix VMR9 range" means turn what I call PC levels on, unchecking it is what I call TV levels. Whether it needs to be expanded or compressed or left alone depends on what gets fed into it, and the stream should signal what's in it - of course it's shouldn't signal incorrectly, as in this case. Otherwise fullrange is assumed off, and since most streams don't have that data, you only experience the right-hand side of the table.

Fullrange on + TV mode means all luma gets compressed. Since the reality is that the stream's fullrange is off, luma is wrong, and since you're outputting YUV, I think, it compounds when the display then assumes fullrange YUV->RGB conversion, even though the stream isn't, because video driver writers keep breaking it. Nice little comedy of errors there.

There appears to be a DXVA flag that can be sent to the video renderer to specify fullrange on or off, described here (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms796493.aspx). My gut feeling is that as usual, cards will ignore it, but it's worth trying and complaining to driver writers if they get it wrong. Then at least the problem wouldn't be compounded. If this was used, Core could add a "default" option to the range conversion, which would simply pass it on to the card unchanged whether fullrange was on or off.

[BetaBoy]

Core could add a "default" option to the range conversion, which would simply pass it on to the card unchanged whether fullrange was on or off.

Very well stated... we already added this option for the next release. Also we noted that the 'VMR9 Fix' name might need to change.

[BlackSun]

I install CoreAVC on Windows Vista Ultimate 32bit.
installing processing seems good, but when I configure,
an error dialog(RunDLL) appears and says initializing routine failed
or so. (Sorry my windows is not english version so, cannot tell exact error message.)

How to fix my problem?

Try to re-install it, but click the details button at the end of the installation and see if the registration of the filter went well.

[nk]

Try to re-install it, but click the details button at the end of the installation and see if the registration of the filter went well.

Output folder: C:\Program Files\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional
Extract: CoreAVCDecoder.ax... 100%
Extract: CoreAVCReadme.txt... 100%
Could not load: C:\Program Files\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\CoreAVCDecoder.ax
Could not load: C:\Program Files\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\CoreAVCDecoder.ax
Created uninstaller: C:\Program Files\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\CoreAVC Professional-uninstall.exe
Create folder: C:\Users\nkoriyama\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional
Create shortcut: C:\Users\nkoriyama\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\CoreAVC Readme.lnk
Create shortcut: C:\Users\nkoriyama\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\Configure CoreAVC.lnk
Create shortcut: C:\Users\nkoriyama\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\Re-Register CoreAVC.lnk
Create shortcut: C:\Users\nkoriyama\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\CoreCodec\CoreAVC Professional\Un-Register CoreAVC.lnk
Completed


This is a installation log of CoreAVC 1.3.0, and not registered as directshow filter.
I have two licenses of CoreAVC, one is used on XP works well,
but another one on Vista does not work at all.

[DeepBeepMeep]

Very well stated... we already added this option for the next release. Also we noted that the 'VMR9 Fix' name might need to change.

An option to force CoreAvc to keep the color levels as they are in the stream (and ignore all the flags) is exactly what we need here. I hope however that your are not referring to the early 1.3 version option which has replaced the 'VMR9 Fix' (that is "Convert TV scale to PC scale"). Although this option is potentially useful it didn't solve the issue.

[Hans Ohlo]

Very well stated... we already added this option for the next release. Also we noted that the 'VMR9 Fix' name might need to change.
oh thanks.

and please add clear descriptions in the readme, so that it is clear what these options manipulate and what not. i can not live with multiple color space convertions which everytime degrade color precision.

OH and... PLEASE get the next release with these fixes sooner than 4-6months from now. minor service releases like 1.3.0.2 or so are very welcome (not only be me i think ;)).

-hans

[DigitalDeviant]

I'm having the same filter registration problem as nk, the error given when trying to unregister, reregister or change the configuration is:

Error Loading C:\....

A dynamic link library (DLL) initialization routine failed.

I'm on XP (logged in as the administrator). I'm already working on this via a trouble ticket but figured it wouldn't hurt to post here too. One (not-so-)small complaint is that it won't let me try to reinstall 1.2. I don't see any reason not to be able to roll back to a previous version.

[nk]

I found a reason why dll can't load, because my system has something wrong with ieframe.dll and shlwapi.dll. I found it by dependency walker.

[DigitalDeviant]

I found a reason why dll can't load, because my system has something wrong with ieframe.dll and shlwapi.dll. I found it by dependency walker.

shlwapi.dll almost always seems to show something wrong, there is a function that doesn't work or something like that which I don't recall off hand now. Maybe ieframe.dll is the problem on yours but I tried the same thing on my end and I have no problems with it. I found a few missing dll's (dwmapi.dll & efsadu.dll) but neither of those was the culprit.

Anyway, I haven't heard back from core support since they emailed me a download link that only pulls up an error page after I log in.

[ACrowley]

For you all... Also we are going to be doing a new CoreAVC release tomorrow for 1.3.0.1 as we have found a serious bug in 1.3 (thanx for the reports everyone!)

is 1.3.0.0 updated now ? cant see a fixed 1.3.0.1 ?

Can only download the 1.3.0.0 from my Account

postponed again ?

[BetaBoy]

I noted we are fixing the reported issues and that we are adding the additional features...

Here are screen caps of the new options...


http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/7167/clipboard01dl4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/3152/clipboard02vu8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[BetaBoy]

Anyway, I haven't heard back from core support since they emailed me a download link that only pulls up an error page after I log in.
The staff will be back on Monday.... atm its only a few ppl that are having the issue and we are trying to see what the common issue is for them but have not found it as of yet.

[foxyshadis]

I'm curious, but can you explain what the difference between aggressive and normal deinterlacing is? Do any of the new options do IVTC instead of deinterlacing?

[Hans Ohlo]

Here are screen caps of the new options...

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/7167/clipboard01dl4.jpg
http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/3152/clipboard02vu8.jpg

ok very nice ;),
will the levels in the stream be left untouched if i select in:pc out:pc?

[DigitalDeviant]

The staff will be back on Monday.... atm its only a few ppl that are having the issue and we are trying to see what the common issue is for them but have not found it as of yet.

So no one is working on this until Monday and even then it's anyones guess when I can get a working decoder? I wouldn't be so upset if I could reinstall 1.2, which worked, but the installer prevents this.

[bob0r]

I'm curious, but can you explain what the difference between aggressive and normal deinterlacing is? Do any of the new options do IVTC instead of deinterlacing?

If i am correct, when we reported H.264 MBAFF streams did not always deinterlace, was because certain features were not detected in the stream, it should be in the forum somewhere, there were like 4 or 5 points where the decoder looks for interlacing.
Now when all those fail, but you are certain you need deinterlacing, you enable the agressive mode, and it will always deinterlace your stream.

[nk]

Betaboy, please answer.

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=974113#post974113
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=974408#post974408
HOW CAN I RUN CoreAVC on Windows Vista?
WHAT IS WRONG? MY ENVIRONMENT? or Windows Vista? or CoreAVC?

[eLupus]

vista is missing the product key for windows that coreavc's installers use to validate your install.

[BetaBoy]

nk.... visit http://support.corecodec.com and submit a ticket and our team will walk you through whats going on.

[BetaBoy]

As requested... here is the CoreAVC 1.3.x Options descriptions... we are adding Tooltips to the installer as well. Please comment on anything that may need clarification.

Accept Input
This setting controls which DirectShow Media Types the decoder accepts on input. Uncheck only if you are troubleshooting problems with CoreAVC incorrectly decoding some variant of H.264, or want to use another decoder for it.

Deblocking
This setting controls how the deblocking step of H.264 specification is executed by the decoder. Deblocking is a complex process that consumes significant processing resources. If your machine is not fast enough, you might want to turn off deblocking for some frames, but it will degrade visual quality.

Standard deblocking - do deblocking exactly as specified by H.264
Skip b-frame deblocking - skip deblocking step when decoding B-frames.
Skip all deblocking - do not perform deblocking at all.

Deinterlacing
This setting specifies how interlaced material is handled by the decoder.

Software deinterlacing - the decoder outputs one deinterlaced frame for each pair of fields.
Software double framerate - the decoder outputs one deinterlaced frame for each input field.
DirectShow deinterlacing - the decoder does not deinterlace video, but flags it as interlaced where appropriate, so Video Renderer filter can deinterlace it.
No deinterlacing - the decoder does not deinterlace video, and flags it as progressive on output.

Aggressive deinterlacing
This option determines how the decoder detects interlacing in source stream.

Off - use only picture timing SEI and POC numbers to detect interlaced video. Unfortunately not all encoders properly flag material as interlaced.
On - in addition to SEI and POC, assumes source is interlaced if any interlaced coding tools are used in encoding the frame (MBAFF, PAFF).

Crop 1088 to 1080
H.264 encoded video size is always a multiple of 16, and sequences that are 1080 pixels high are encoded as 1088 padded at the bottom. Also H.264 specifications provides a set of cropping parameters to signal that parts of the encoded picture are not important and should not be displayed. Some H.264 encoders fail to specify cropping parameters when encoding 1080 video.

Off - do not crop video.
On - when input video is exactly 1088 pixels high, crop 8 pixels off the bottom.

Force VMR AR correction
This option can be used if you are working with the decoder outside the normal player environment.

Off - does not change VMR settings.
On - instructs VMR filter to maintain aspect ration of the video that it displays. Normally this AR correction is the responsibility of a video player. This option should normally be off.

Color space output
This setting determines the preferred output color space. The decoder tries each format in order specified until it is accepted by the Video Renderer filter.

Levels
H.264 specification allows two variants of Luminance range encoding. The default one, so called TV levels, sets the black level at 16 and white level at 235, and allows blacker-than-black and whiter-than-white levels. Another option is full-range luminance, so called PC levels, it has black at 0, and white at 255. H.264 streams by default use TV levels, but a full-range flag may be specified that signals PC levels use in the stream. Change these options only when you are troubleshooting incorrectly encoded streams, or use a misbehaving Video Renderer.

Input levels
TV (16-235) - always assume the stream uses TV levels
PC (0-255) - always assume the stream uses PC levels
Autodetect - use the fullrange flag in the stream to determine Luminance range

Output levels, this also affects conversion to RGB color space when it is done by the decoder.
TV (16-235) - assume the Video Renderer expects TV levels
PC (0-255) - assume the Video Renderer expects PC levels
Autodetect - use PC levels when VMR is used as a Video Renderer, and TV levels for all others.

[dchard]

BetaBoy: I'am sorry if someone asked before, but when th GPU support will be added? With the upcoming 1.3 version or later?

Thanks!

Dchard

[ChronoCross]

it's been asked about 800 times. And the answer is the same....

"No comment at this time"

[clsid]

Meanwhile all early adopters have already been waiting for almost exactly 1 year (!!!) for the promised GPU support :eek:

I say class action lawsuit :devil:

[ChronoCross]

Meanwhile all early adopters have already been waiting for almost exactly 1 year (!!!) for the promised GPU support :eek:

I say class action lawsuit :devil:

for a feature you knew wasn't in the product at purchase and no definitive date was set? That'll get about 5 seconds into it before the judge pounds the gavel and says dismissed.

[tomos]

for a feature you knew wasn't in the product at purchase and no definitive date was set? That'll get about 5 seconds into it before the judge pounds the gavel and says dismissed.

so does that mean you can add any 'feature' you want?

*guaranteed to use less than 1% CPU time

* not a guarantee! feature to be added in the future at some random time

so is that how nvidia/ati always get away with their various *'claims'?

*lies

[clsid]

Consumer law says that if a product doesn't deliver what can reasonably be expected of it, then a consumer is entitled to a refund.

Any judge will agree with me that 1 year is not a reasonable delay considering how the feature was marketed here on Doom9.


/me feels sorry for everyone who bought CoreAVC for its GPU support.

[Inventive Software]

/me waits till CoreCodec actually make it open-source before critisising it's lack of GPU, since somebody else could probably add it before they do! :D

[clsid]

Adding GPU support is probably much much more difficult than they anticipated. They are also dependent on ATI/nVidia for getting the required information. But CoreCodec should be more honest about things and just say it takes a couple more months.

[Zag]

Just curious, but why is GPU support so important now days? With dual-core cpu pretty much mainstream why even bother.

[ChronoCross]

Consumer law says that if a product doesn't deliver what can reasonably be expected of it, then a consumer is entitled to a refund.

Any judge will agree with me that 1 year is not a reasonable delay considering how the feature was marketed here on Doom9.


/me feels sorry for everyone who bought CoreAVC for its GPU support.

glad your not my lawyer. Consumer law says nothing about features that will be added. There is no such thing as a reasonable time frame for something that never had a timeframe in the first place. As long as it's added in the 1.x generation then they have followed all laws.

Adding GPU support is probably much much more difficult than they anticipated. They are also dependent on ATI/nVidia for getting the required information. But CoreCodec should be more honest about things and just say it takes a couple more months.

They already said it's going to take more time. They have no reason to tell you the reasoning and are likely under some agreement to that effect. Even if they aren't it's simply a marketing decision. It's still the most efficient software decoder around.

Just curious, but why is GPU support so important now days? With dual-core cpu pretty much mainstream why even bother.

Agreed. I have a single core 2.4 ghz athlon 64 and can play 1088i mbaff with AC3 audio. Dual core would make it a cinch.

[tomos]

bacause it's a cpu that is unused? if you want to leave something encoding in the background, it's kind of a waste of time if just watching a movie at the same time takes up a large amount of cpu time.

[clsid]

glad your not my lawyer. Consumer law says nothing about features that will be added. There is no such thing as a reasonable time frame for something that never had a timeframe in the first place. As long as it's added in the 1.x generation then they have followed all laws.

GPU support *IS* listed as a feature on their website. People buy the product with that in mind. Compare it with buying a car and a spare wheel that has an unknown delivery delay.

According to you they can add it 10 years from now since they didn't specify a date. Or even a day after the goddamn sun has burned out. I say that time DOES matter, no matter if a specific date has been given or not. It should be delivered within a *REASONABLE* timeframe. Specially since they raised the expectation that it could be expected shortly after the 1.0 release. If they fail to deliver the full product as it was advertised within a timely fashion, then users should be entitled to a refund.
They already said it's going to take more time. They have no reason to tell you the reasoning and are likely under some agreement to that effect. Even if they aren't it's simply a marketing decision.
You obviously don't know their reasoning. So don't use your guesses as an argument. Perhaps they are failing to make it work properly.
It's still the most efficient software decoder around.
That's a fallacy.

[pookguy88]

Is there Vista support yet?
1.3 available yet?

[tomos]

some versions work fine in vista. dont know about the official ones though

[ChronoCross]

GPU support *IS* listed as a feature on their website. People buy the product with that in mind. Compare it with buying a car and a spare wheel that has an unknown delivery delay.

According to you they can add it 10 years from now since they didn't specify a date. Or even a day after the goddamn sun has burned out. I say that time DOES matter, no matter if a specific date has been given or not. It should be delivered within a *REASONABLE* timeframe. Specially since they raised the expectation that it could be expected shortly after the 1.0 release. If they fail to deliver the full product as it was advertised within a timely fashion, then users should be entitled to a refund.

You obviously don't know their reasoning. So don't use your guesses as an argument. Perhaps they are failing to make it work properly.

That's a fallacy.

It's listed but says "added at a later date" perhaps you missed that. It also doesn't specify a date. If you bought it for GPU support you should have waited till it was implemented and you lose the right to complain that it;s not ready.

Yes they can add it in 10 years if they wanted. As long as it's released within the 1.x branch. I think the sun burns out is a bit overkill as all purchasers of coreavc will be long dead.

As for faster software decoder I think your misplacing people who already support GPU with coreavc pure software decoding. I haven't yet seen a legitimate non-biased test showing that anything is better. ffdshow is for sure not faster and doesn't support the features nor do I expect it to for a free software project. I accept it's limitations.

[clsid]

I am not blind. I know exactly what it says on the website. That is also my point. They shouldn't list it as a (future) feature if they can't deliver it in a reasonable time.

Again, the fact that CoreAVC performance is already good without GPU support is of no relevance to this discussion.

[Weltall]

I agree with you clsid :)

Btw, what about that GPU support? If there is it, cpu will not be used, just graphics card? 0% cpu use to decode video???? +__+

Could someone explain me what everyone is complaining about this level and color stuff in coreavc? I didn't get well. Is coreavc showing "pc level" videos like "tv level"'s in some unusual case, like an option enabled which had to be enabled, but couldn't do this kind of problem? I'm stucked :P

[_xxl]

Please try nero's avc decoder which is multithreaded and DXVA and see how much cpu it uses.

[JohnnyFu]

Btw, what about that GPU support? If there is it, cpu will not be used, just graphics card? 0% cpu use to decode video????

The GPU takes over specific arithmetic operations, this can reduce the CPU usage significant. On some files it decreases the CPU usage from 90-100% to 50-60% on my single core AMD K8 (cyberlink decoder).
But there still remains alot of work for the CPU.

[Jay Bee]

Any news on the release date for a CoreAVC version with the AVI bug fixed?

And concerning GPU support it's worth mentioning that I have yet to see a GPU assisted AVC decoder that performs deblocking. This is probably ATI/Nvidia's responsibility so IMO it's unlikely that a CoreAVC GPU version would be any different.

[Disabled]

And concerning GPU support it's worth mentioning that I have yet to see a GPU assisted AVC decoder that performs deblocking. This is probably ATI/Nvidia's responsibility so IMO it's unlikely that a CoreAVC GPU version would be any different.

Unfortunately they have to! They advertised a GPU accelerated H264 Decoder and deblocking is part of the standard. If they won't allow deblocking combined with GPU accel, they have a sub H264 implementation GPU accelerated and thats not what they advertised.

[Jay Bee]

I agree but ATI/Nvidia/Cyberlink etc. have been getting away with it for quite a while now. In fact I have never even seen this issue mentioned on any of the internet computing sites.

[clsid]

Maybe DXVA2 is better in that aspect.

[HookedOnTV]

I've got jerky playback. Running Vista with CoreAVC v1.3, x2 3800. Through the process of elimination I found the 720p encodes(x264, 1280x720, 4500kbs, HQ-Slow) play back jerky. Same clip at 544p plays smooth. CPU utilization never goes above 40% on the 720p clip so I am lost at this point. Is there something wrong with CoreAVC?

[ChronoCross]

I've got jerky playback. Running Vista with CoreAVC v1.3, x2 3800. Through the process of elimination I found the 720p encodes(x264, 1280x720, 4500kbs, HQ-Slow) play back jerky. Same clip at 544p plays smooth. CPU utilization never goes above 40% on the 720p clip so I am lost at this point. Is there something wrong with CoreAVC?

I'd say there is a problem with something on your machine. Are you using IDE drives or sub par memory? there has got to be a bottleneck with your system hardware.

[Jay Bee]

I've got jerky playback. Running Vista with CoreAVC v1.3, x2 3800. Through the process of elimination I found the 720p encodes(x264, 1280x720, 4500kbs, HQ-Slow) play back jerky. Same clip at 544p plays smooth. CPU utilization never goes above 40% on the 720p clip so I am lost at this point. Is there something wrong with CoreAVC?

Are the files 60 fps? Do they work with Xvid? Do you have an AGP card? I had similar problems when I used AGP cards but they've gone after switching to PCIE.

[HookedOnTV]

23.976 fps. IDE hard drive but the files are coming across gbit. Memory is Crucial DDR400 running 1:1. PCIe Gforce 7600GT. All other formats play fine (xvid, wmv, mpeg2), although h264 stuff is going to be the hardest. Recent Vista install. Ran all the updates. Got the latest drivers. Installed ffdshow, CoreAVC and Haali Media Splitter.

[Ronin-7]

23.976 fps. IDE hard drive but the files are coming across gbit. Memory is Crucial DDR400 running 1:1. PCIe Gforce 7600GT. All other formats play fine (xvid, wmv, mpeg2), although h264 stuff is going to be the hardest. Recent Vista install. Ran all the updates. Got the latest drivers. Installed ffdshow, CoreAVC and Haali Media Splitter.

You don't have Cool & Quiet enabled in the bios by any chance ?

[HookedOnTV]

You don't have Cool & Quiet enabled in the bios by any chance ?


It might be. I'll check.

[HookedOnTV]

It was enabled but disabling it made no difference.

Update: Disabling Aero fixed it.

[hdboy]

Please try nero's avc decoder which is multithreaded and DXVA and see how much cpu it uses.

I have nero but I don't see a AVC decoder directshow filter. Is there one? what is the exact name?

[AKarpo]

Hey guys, I'm just wondering what the version # of the current CoreAVC build is...Has 1.3.0.1 been released? Are the major issues fixed?

I noticed some people were having some Vista compatibility problems earlier in the thread; I was thinking about purchasing CoreAVC, but I might wait for GPU support to be added before I take the plunge.

[Ronin-7]

It was enabled but disabling it made no difference.

Update: Disabling Aero fixed it.

Interesting might be display driver related (if not a CoreAVC issue), ATI & NVIDIA have released newer Vista drivers of late that may be worth checking out.

[nk]

nk.... visit http://support.corecodec.com and submit a ticket and our team will walk you through whats going on.

I submitted a ticket 4 days ago.
BUT NO RESPONSE FROM CORECODEC!

Today I recieved a mail.

This message concerns your Ticket #NZV-119366. We have not received any response back from you in 96 hours, and would like to know if you consider this issue to be resolved. If you have any further questions, simply respond to this Email.

Subject: Not work CoreAVC on Vista Ultimate 32bit
Department: CoreAVC
Priority: Medium
Status: Open

Please note that the Ticket will automatically be closed within 24 hours if no response is received from you. The Ticket will not be closed in the case that you send another reply.


Is this your company's solution way?
I have not recieved any response from corecodec about tihs problem.
I recieved ONLY THIS MAIL.:mad:

[DigitalDeviant]

If you're still referring to the "A dynamic link library (DLL) initialization routine failed." error then I'm in the same boat. I opened a ticket on March 21st. The last response from anyone from Core was on March 26th saying "We are still woring on the issue." and my ticket was placed on hold. I emailed back Monday to see if there was any change but have not received any reply.

Currently I do not have a working decoder. 1.2 was working untill I tried to install 1.3. Now I can't reinstall 1.2 because the installer refuses to install an older version. This is completely unnecessary! Why can't I fall back to an older version of software I've purchased?

[Pomyk]

[deleted]

[DeepBeepMeep]

Betaboy, any news regarding the release date of the fixed/improved Coreavc 1.3 ? The color space issue was the only thing that still bothered me...

[bob0r]

http://x264.nl/duke_core_what.gif

[redrumchoy]

Alright, this is going to be my first post ever. I've been following these threads on CoreAVC for a while now, and I've been checking the coreavc website for the past month(s). How the hell do I actually purchase a license/download CoreAVC?!!?! It's been "CoreAVC sales will be back up in a few days!" for month(s)!

[ChronoCross]

Alright, this is going to be my first post ever. I've been following these threads on CoreAVC for a while now, and I've been checking the coreavc website for the past month(s). How the hell do I actually purchase a license/download CoreAVC?!!?! It's been "CoreAVC sales will be back up in a few days!" for month(s)!

you won't be able to purchase it until the next version comes out. 1.3.x

[Episode]

So CoreCodec doesn't want you to buy their stuff?-)

[Inventive Software]

Hehe... this is all the more reason for me to wait until either it becomes open-source, or I stay with ffdshow! :D

[zambelli]

I apologize for perhaps beating a dead horse, but traversing a thread of this length for the latest and most accurate information is somewhat difficult. :confused:

My question is: is it or will it be possible to transfer the CoreAVC license from one machine to another? Not to be used simultaneously, of course. It seems strange that CoreAVC can phone home to register the software with a particular OS serial, but it can't phone home to unregister and free up the license.

[Inventive Software]

My impression from Betaboy was that you could transfer from XP to Vista if you were upgrading to Vista. This is because they wanted to smooth the process of upgrading completely, so to speak. I don't think you can transfer back to XP. Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, however...

Transferring between machines is tricky, but shouldn't be more difficult than basically uninstalling on one machine, re-installing on another, re-activating and proving you're just migrating machines, so to speak.

[Shinigami-Sama]

I apologize for perhaps beating a dead horse, but traversing a thread of this length for the latest and most accurate information is somewhat difficult. :confused:

My question is: is it or will it be possible to transfer the CoreAVC license from one machine to another? Not to be used simultaneously, of course. It seems strange that CoreAVC can phone home to register the software with a particular OS serial, but it can't phone home to unregister and free up the license.

The last time this came up I believe beta boy said you have to send in a ticket to transfer it and it was only a grace period

I do find it a little odd they have a system that could do this nicely yet it seems to not be working out very well


as for vista it was also a grace period update last I seen

[bob0r]

@BetaBoy

Permission to use 1.2 "unactivation version" on Windows Vista?

1.3 just SUX, makes most H.264 play like you are on crack (known problem, but where is the fix??)
And 1.3 wont activate, on vista, ofcourse.

This is just getting ridiculous! :rolleyes:

[ChronoCross]

@BetaBoy

Permission to use 1.2 "unactivation version" on Windows Vista?

1.3 just SUX, makes most H.264 play like you are on crack (known problem, but where is the fix??)
And 1.3 wont activate, on vista, ofcourse.

This is just getting ridiculous! :rolleyes:

another pirate? ARGH

[bob0r]

Hehe, not yet, i am asking for permission :)

[Disabled]

Here is another one for you CC:
Any News on GPU Support?

<°)))o><

[ChronoCross]

Here is another one for you CC:
Any News on GPU Support?

<°)))o><

aren't you like the 100th person to ask?

Same answer applies. It's not going to be in 1.3.

[Sirber]

aren't you like the 100th person to ask?

Same answer applies. It's not going to be in 1.3.

then what's going to be in 1.3?

[Guest]

It's all academic, because you still cannot buy it!

[Hans Ohlo]

hey, i am sure they are just taking care of the last immedate bugs. the release is just around the corner...

-chris

p.s. for everyone who has left his sarcasm detector off... THIS was sarcasm!

[DigitalDeviant]

then what's going to be in 1.3?

Well, 1.3 introduced bugs which have made it so the decoder won't register on my PC. It's been about a month since I opened a ticket on Core's support site and well over three weeks since it was placed on hold with a "we're working on it" message. Repeated emails and posts on their site have gone unanswered and in the meantime I cannot reinstall 1.2 which worked. I would advise anyone with a current account not to upgrade yet.

And to reiterate... there has been no help from CoreCodec!

[ChronoCross]

then what's going to be in 1.3?

go back a few pages in this thread. Or the rant thread one of the two betaboy posted a changelog as well as some screenshots.

Also they made additional changes after the OEM test due to user demand.

[Disabled]

incidentally, the just released nvidia 8500/8600 cards promise to offload 100% of avc decoding to the GPU. for ex: reduce cpu usage to 5% on a x2 3800 while playing back casino royal bluray h264.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=835630&page=4

what does this mean for coreavc? I think they need to move fast to add h/w support.

move fast? Why that, they never said when GPU support will be added.
If in 2010 any low price CPU can decode AVC with 3% usage and you just have to link a library into your project to get GPU accell you still cant moan, cause you got what you paid for:devil:
[/irony]

[Hans Ohlo]

But i really want to know what is going on. A clear statement would be much appreciated.
Will we ever see GPU support ? In 6 months, in 12 months, in 18 months ?
i also would like to know when we willl get news and so on... there was talk about small bug fixes and that 1.3.0.1 will be very closely released... but corecodec spits on its customers! (sorry to put it that drasticly)

[DeepBeepMeep]

Well it doesn't look good news...

First there is this total absence of feeback from betaboy. It already happened several times in the past, so it shouldn't be such a worry, it is the trademark of "core" :-). However, what is even more intriguing is that the sales option has been disabled on their website for quite a long time

Here are my two cents theories:
- core is about to / or has gone bankrupt, speed of the software decoder is no longer a significant competitive advantage given the progress of hardware based decoding
- they stay away from annoying / demanding customers (that is us!) to focus on their OEM customers

Either way it doesn't smell good. Maybe the good news is that people do not seem be bothered anymore with coreavc given the low activity of this thread recently...

[ChronoCross]

I think it's because you guys spent so much time bitching that it's no longer worth their time to post here.

Considering you guys want a perfect product and yet want it tomorrow. You can't have both.

[DigitalDeviant]

I think it's because you guys spent so much time bitching that it's no longer worth their time to post here.

Considering you guys want a perfect product and yet want it tomorrow. You can't have both.

What about their own forums and support site? I've had a ticket submitted and have been emailing, posting on their forums (and here), private messaging, etc. them and haven't had a reply in well over a month. I haven't been 'bitching', it's all been very polite. All I want is a working decoder, which I haven't had since 1.3 was rolled out.

[Jay Bee]

I think it's because you guys spent so much time bitching that it's no longer worth their time to post here.

Considering you guys want a perfect product and yet want it tomorrow. You can't have both.

It wasn't the forum users that mentioned the word "tomorrow" (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=972790&postcount=2655).

[ChronoCross]

It wasn't the forum users that mentioned the word "tomorrow" (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=972790&postcount=2655).

it's the forum people that are harping on it. What if they found another bug. What if x? what if? seriously you can't take everything you read as 100%. no company has ever released any software ever that has been announced for a specific date. Why do you think companies say things like 4th quarter 2007.

you guys are just pissing yourselves off more posting here and mulling over it.

[Jay Bee]

What if they found another bug. What if x? what if? seriously you can't take everything you read as 100%. no company has ever released any software ever that has been announced for a specific date. Why do you think companies say things like 4th quarter 2007.




Nothing wrong with what you say. But scale does matter. Over one month, without a word, instead of one day as announced. That's not the same as for instance saying Q1, announcing delay and then releasing in Q2.

[Pomyk]

it's the forum people that are harping on it. What if they found another bug. What if x? what if? seriously you can't take everything you read as 100%. no company has ever released any software ever that has been announced for a specific date. Why do you think companies say things like 4th quarter 2007.

you guys are just pissing yourselves off more posting here and mulling over it.

Look from the user point of view...
I paid for this product a YEAR ago and I still have to use ffdshow because CoreAVC doesn't decode properly.

[ChronoCross]

Look from the user point of view...
I paid for this product a YEAR ago and I still have to use ffdshow because CoreAVC doesn't decode properly.

I bought it too............and the errors it does have are noticeable only upon extreme analysis. If you just watch something you won't notice it.

[DigitalDeviant]

I bought it three... and as of March 21st it has not functioned on the PC it's registered to. March 26th was the last time anyone from Core communicated anything to me in any fashion. Since then I have been using ffdshow. I'd have no problem with waiting if I could reinstall 1.2, but Core has made it so you cannot revert to a previous version.

I'm not asking that they fix minor decoding bugs or add new features, I just want a working decoder.

[Pomyk]

I bought it too............and the errors it does have are noticeable only upon extreme analysis. If you just watch something you won't notice it.

When you're anime encoder you notice even smallest errors ;)

[Neo Fagin]

I bought it too............and the errors it does have are noticeable only upon extreme analysis. If you just watch something you won't notice it.

I just watched a 1080p x264 encode which had nasty macroblocking and trails caused by coreavc, which don't show up when the same movie's watched with ffdshow. So no, they're very noticeable, and yes, coreavc is still buggy and cutting corners to gain speed over other decoders. Which I don't object to, but they need to be honest about it.

[ChronoCross]

When you're anime encoder you notice even smallest errors ;)

Like I said.....you only notice it if your paying attention. Anime encoders pay attention. If I just watch something my eyes ignore things. If I'm encoding something then my eyes pick up on it.

It's about turning it on and off. You guys posting here so you seem to be happy with ffdshow.....so why are you even bothering with coreavc?

[Sirber]

ffdshow is sadly not smp :(

[DigitalDeviant]

It's about turning it on and off. You guys posting here so you seem to be happy with ffdshow.....so why are you even bothering with coreavc?

I am not happy with ffdshow, I am stuck with ffdshow. There is a big difference.

[Neo Fagin]

Because ffdshow is fine for my media PC that can keep up. I bought and paid for coreavc specifically to use on my workstation which cannot.

As a paying customer, I feel the nasty macroblocking bug present in CoreAVC should be fixed, or it should be stated up-front that it is not a "bug", but a side-effect of CoreAVC's coding that enables it to be signifigantly faster than other decoders. I should not be told, "oh who cares about some ringing and a few macroblocks, just ignore them, you people with platinum eyes have issues, maybe you should use ffdshow". I mean, hey I'll go master some DVDs and do a 3h movie in MPEG-2 as a DVD5 and tell customers who complain about the movie being blocky and VHS-quality, "well if you just watch it you won't notice it".

Generally speaking it is to be assumed that people who are watching h.264 video are "paying attention" since h.264 is the primary next-gen video codec used on high-definition video. We are "paying attention" to better video quality, thusly we are also "paying attention" to gigantic trails of macroblocks that splash across the screen in many h.264/x264 encoded movies played back with CoreAVC.

If the developers were willing to address the issue and simply publically state that you can expect slightly reduced image quality or occasional macroblocks when using CoreAVC as a tradeoff for its speed, I'd be fine with it and would probably still have paid for it. Well, if it were even possible to pay for it, or possible to register it, depending on the operational condition or lack thereof of their registration service.

[ACrowley]

Because ffdshow is fine for my media PC that can keep up. I bought and paid for coreavc specifically to use on my workstation which cannot.

As a paying customer, I feel the nasty macroblocking bug present in CoreAVC should be fixed, or it should be stated up-front that it is not a "bug", but a side-effect of CoreAVC's coding that enables it to be signifigantly faster than other decoders. I should not be told, "oh who cares about some ringing and a few macroblocks, just ignore them, you people with platinum eyes have issues, maybe you should use ffdshow". I mean, hey I'll go master some DVDs and do a 3h movie in MPEG-2 as a DVD5 and tell customers who complain about the movie being blocky and VHS-quality, "well if you just watch it you won't notice it".


youre right...

the Blocking is very very ugly .
I have it on a lot of x264 encodes. Its mostly in fast Movement Scenes with Fog,Water etc

ffdshow,Cyberlink, VLC is without Blocking in these Scenes.
It is surely a CoreAVC Bug!

I use Cyberlink without DXVA for Playback and ffdshow for Directshowsource

[KoD]

Are you guys using "Standard deblocking" in CoreAVC ? I'm surprised to see those bugs are so frequent as my personal experience is completely different.

[Foreigner999]

Well it doesn't look good news...

First there is this total absence of feeback from betaboy. It already happened several times in the past, so it shouldn't be such a worry, it is the trademark of "core" :-). However, what is even more intriguing is that the sales option has been disabled on their website for quite a long time

Here are my two cents theories:
- core is about to / or has gone bankrupt, speed of the software decoder is no longer a significant competitive advantage given the progress of hardware based decoding
- they stay away from annoying / demanding customers (that is us!) to focus on their OEM customers

Either way it doesn't smell good. Maybe the good news is that people do not seem be bothered anymore with coreavc given the low activity of this thread recently...

I suspect that has more to do with the availability of the cracked warez version than anything else. Complaining therefore has probably taken a back seat, as an improvement request to the cracked version rather than the official version with restrictions. If there was no cracked version I'm sure alot more people would be complaining, period. Before there was such a version alot of people were complaining.

Now, not so many. Makes you wonder why, huh?

[bob0r]

Soon online: X264 SPECIAL CoreAVC edition!!!
And when i get removal notice... ill reply just as quick as Core does to support emails!!!

Fair trade!!


FUCKING CRAP COMPANY.... and to think i got 3 people to buy coreavc....... Fucking useless

Fuck (This goes not for Haali, he still rocks very very much)

Edit, to below:
I'll let you know once Core replies to the emails

[Kurtnoise]

Is it the right place for such sentences ?

come on...

[Romario]

Is it the right place for such sentences ?

come on...

You can bet this is right place for such sentences. He is right.

[G_M_C]

Guyz, please calm down. Remember that ther is (or was ?) a separate thread for all complaining etc. of CoreCodec.

I simply put down my idea of a, in my opinion bleak, future for coreAVC, when they dont come with innovative features quickly. I think that becasue they are quickly surpassed in features, speed and user-friendlyness by both big GPU-manufacturers.

And i put down my opinion hoping that we all get a healthy discussion about this. Maybe we could even exchange idea's on this subject with betaboy etc. themselves. In other words: Let discuss the subject, without flaming etc.

[ChronoCross]

Immature people need to get off the internet

[ACrowley]

Are you guys using "Standard deblocking" in CoreAVC ? I'm surprised to see those bugs are so frequent as my personal experience is completely different.

The ugly Macroblocking appears with or without deblocking

[chros]

The ugly Macroblocking appears with or without deblocking
You can cut out a sample from your file to show the others :) (I know what your talking about :) , but I haven't got any at the moment.)
(with mkvmerge, or demux to mp4 then mp4box has cut function)

[3ngel]

@ChronoCross
Please don't do a "servant bowing" because it's a clear fact that CoreAvc company is going to s*it.
And think about it, all that started when they started the DRM thing...

[HowlerX]

You can cut out a sample from your file to show the others :) (I know what your talking about :) , but I haven't got any at the moment.)
(with mkvmerge, or demux to mp4 then mp4box has cut function)

Try this sample:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BF2IX6WU

[_xxl]

The ugly Macroblocking appears with or without deblocking
http://www.cccp-project.net/wiki/index.php?title=CoreAVC
or
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=119187

[ChronoCross]

@ChronoCross
Please don't do a "servant bowing" because it's a clear fact that CoreAvc company is going to s*it.
And think about it, all that started when they started the DRM thing...

stop trolling before telling me to do something.

[Jay Bee]

Try this sample:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BF2IX6WU

Problem confirmed with CoreAVC 1.3. Cyberlink and ffdshow work. I wouldn't call it a blocking issue, it's plain corruption.

[KoD]

It might be that only certain resolutions or only h264 streams conforming with certain profiles get accelerated. Like those xvid/divs standalones that can handle only a limited number of b-frames. I would be really amazed if hardware is designed to support every h264 feature from avanced profiles. Pretty much like how the PSP only allows certain profiles and even then it has restrictions on the use of certain features when encoding to make a stream the hardware is able to handle.

[Neo Fagin]

stop trolling before telling me to do something.

I think at this point people are more or less laughing at you for white knighting so fiendishly for CoreAVC whenever any problems with it are brought up; it's like you invested your nest egg into the company or something and are in massive denial over the company's imminent collapse in the face of new h.264 accelerating GPUs.

The irony of course is had Core not gone with their idiotic failure of a DRM scheme, the macroblocking issue and numerous other smaller issues with the codec would have probably been mostly overlooked as minor nuisances.

Instead, here we are with CoreCodec's reputation forever tarnished by their utter failure to deliver a working product, and you looking like a fool for having defended them with such fervour to the bitter end.

The fact is that at this point, they have taken many, many people's money and not given them what they paid for, and they don't respond to queries or customer concerns. This is what is called "fraud". Frankly speaking I think BetaBoy and the Core team are going to have the disaster of the CoreAVC DRM scheme follow them to the end of time, if I was a developer of CoreAVC I certainly would be leery of putting it on my resume while looking for a job elsewhere.

[Neo Fagin]

http://nwgat.net/woot/files/21/backdraft1080p/mmblocks.jpg

Man now that's some quality blocking. I'm so proud I paid for this.

(In that particular x264 encoded movie, almost 1% of the frames experience this blocking when using CoreAVC)

[Episode]

Before this goes any further, I'd like to remind you about forum rule #4. :thanks:

4) Be nice to each other and respect the moderator. Profanity and insults will not be tolerated. If you have a problem with another member turn to the respective moderator and if the moderator can't help you send a private message to Doom9.

[Revgen]

I'm glad I bought this early. I've had no problems with the releases.

I can confirm that some of the sources you guys released do have blocking issues with my version too.

[ACrowley]

Problem confirmed with CoreAVC 1.3. Cyberlink and ffdshow work. I wouldn't call it a blocking issue, it's plain corruption.

not only with vers CoreAVC 1.3
Its with 1.2 too

Exactly what it looks like :

http://nwgat.net/woot/files/21/backdraft1080p/mmblocks.jpg

Mostly on Scenes with Smoke, Rain, Water

[foxyshadis]

It's a little past time to clean up, so recent discussion moved to New DXVA/GPU accel. discussion (from CoreAVC) (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=125835).

[Flash_Git]

I have a deblocking issue with 1.3. When set to "Skip All Deblocking" I find that sometimes it performs deblocking for a few frames anyway which gets distracting.

[KoD]

Although unrelated to the previous post (which looks like a genuine bug, although I have not tested it), I'll just write what follows since I've seen other threads where people don't understand what to expect when skipping inloop deblocking.

Once and for all: inloop deblocking is compulsory by the h264 standard. Frames that reference other frames expect those other frames to be deblocked. If those frames are not deblocked, then you get artifacts when decoding future frames that reference them.

The "skip deblocking" option in the decoder is there only so that people with not enough cpu power could at least see something, but don't expect to see an artifact free image !!!

[Neo Fagin]

I'll just add that the blocking is not specific to any particular profiles or encode settings. Movies I've encoded with deblock -5:-5 or deblock -1:-1 experience it, doesn't matter what bframe settings are used, doesn't matter what CQM is used. It is not (as was previously stated a long while back) specific to encodes with very strange deblock settings like -6:6 or the like.

The only correlation I've noticed is that the more grain the movie has, the more this blocking problem occurs. It looks, at least to me, like certain I MBs are being corrupted or not decoded properly by CoreAVC, resulting in block trails from blocks predicted from them, until the next I-frame or until the predicted chain ends.

As this problem even occurs on broadcast and disc sources, it is obvious that CoreAVC cannot claim itself to be a compliant decoder until this bug is fixed. If CoreCodec ever does fix this bug, such a fix should be a priority, and its customers should not be required to pay for the upgrade.

Since the Core developers have vanished from this thread and they don't even appear to reply to threads on their own forums anymore, I'm going to assume the devs have stopped work on CoreAVC to move on to other ventures. I myself want my money back, though I doubt it'll ever happen. If the developers had invested as much time into making the codec compliant and bug-free as they invested in their fruitless DRM scheme that cost them thousands of dollars of business, none of this would be happening. And the DRM was proven useless, it was broken within a day of launch - by people who needed to break it in order to use the product they paid for after the activation scheme failed.

I really wish this codec worked. It had and has a lot of promise. There's a big market for a GPU accelerated h264 codec with h264 video having such market penetration and it being essentially a replacement for MPEG-2 on discs and in appliances. But at this point I just recommend that people upgrade their system rather than paying for this product.

[chros]

If the developers had invested as much time into making the codec compliant and bug-free as they invested in their fruitless DRM scheme that cost them thousands of dollars of business, none of this would be happening. And the DRM was proven useless, it was broken within a day of launch - by people who needed to break it in order to use the product they paid for after the activation scheme failed.
Yep, you're right. Maybe the Core guys had discovered this too, and drop DRM, and try to focus to fix bugs.
And maybe it's theirs' chance to come back with the new DXVA 2.0 layer! I hope they realize this.

And: it's always good to have an alternative solution (I mean CoreAVC). You can decide that if it's worth it for you or not (bugs, drm), but it's very handy sometime (eg. a 29.97 fps full 720p sport material, when ffdshow can't bear with it on my Athlon X2 4600, 'cause the lack of multiprocessing).

[3ngel]

Yep, you're right. Maybe the Core guys had discovered this too, and drop DRM, and try to focus to fix bugs.
Unfortunately i don't think so.
If they were just a minimum smart they would have dropped the DRM thing loooooong time ago...
But they attitude has been "What?? I can't hear you... line disturbed...", and in first place they acted like their little code was something like a photoshop! but WTF! :)
Me too says what a pity, it was a promising piece of software.

[clsid]

I think CoreCodec is spending all their resources in the JOOST project.

[Cryptum]

They work for the Joost project ???
Surprise surprise !

[bob0r]

They work ???

[Revgen]

http://www.joost.com/

[Neo Fagin]

Well, I shouldn't be surprised, considering Joost is big money and the "few" customers who paid for the codec directly that have no working product are merely an annoyance to them by comparison, I suppose. :rolleyes:

People using Joost won't care about macroblocking.

[Shinigami-Sama]

I just to a 5 min fly through the site and found no reference to core, can someone show me a link or something then?

[Episode]

This is the only reference I could find: http://joost.com/forums/p/2007/04/10-things-you-might-not-known-about-joost/

[popper]

This is the only reference I could find: http://joost.com/forums/p/2007/04/10-things-you-might-not-known-about-joost/
http://joost.com/support/faq/Technology.html#What-video-decoder-does-the-client-use

[KoD]

I don't want to be rude, but that's a smart move from their part. Piracy of their software decoder can't be stopped but money coming in from doing business with another company is certain. I doubt they have the resources to work on multiple projects at the same time as well, so focusing only on Joost is best for Core.

[Mutant_Fruit]

I don't want to be rude, but that's a smart move from their part. Piracy of their software decoder can't be stopped but money coming in from doing business with another company is certain. I doubt they have the resources to work on multiple projects at the same time as well, so focusing only on Joost is best for Core.
So what you're saying is that it's perfectly OK for a company to take people's money and give them a product that does not work as expected and then for that same company to ignore all support calls and pretty much leave all their cutomers in the dark?

This is all ok? To be honest, a few "this product is not fit for the purposes it was sold for" followed with a reverse charge on the payment would probably get them to, at the very least, respond to the support calls in some manner.

[ChronoCross]

If your unhappy and not getting a response just do a chargeback. Instead of bitching and whining and moaning. You can just use another commercial decoder or a free one.

No point in waiting any longer if you don't think anything is going to get done. All you do is rehash the same things over and over and over.

[Neo Fagin]

I suspect they can no longer take paypal payments due to the number of complaints, paypal generally shuts your account off if you exceed a certain number of complaints/chargebacks in a particular timeframe. If they received enough chargebacks their merchant credit card ability would also be revoked, meaning they CAN'T effectively sell CoreAVC online any longer at this point. That could explain their payment system being fubar.

People aren't "rehashing the same points over and over" so much as they're grouping together to complain and inform potential customers that the product sucks. Multiple voices hold more weight than one.

I bought the codec too long ago to file for my money back. So bitching, and thusly costing CoreCodec further business by informing potential customers of the codec's problems and shortfalls, is my recourse.

[G_M_C]

Hmmmm, since the whole CoreAVC is based in the US, i'm amazed that nobody has filed suit against them yet (to ask for money, generally in the US amounting to rediculous amounts).

It amazes me because, seen from the EU where i live, it seems that everybody in the US sues everybody else for everything and every reason ( :D ) but it hasnt happened agains CC yet.

[Pomyk]

If they don't plan to fix the decoder and can't sell it anymore they could just release source code so somebody would fix it.

[Romario]

If your unhappy and not getting a response just do a chargeback. Instead of bitching and whining and moaning. You can just use another commercial decoder or a free one.

You arn't very polite, you can't talk like that to anyone on this forum, I noticed your rude behaviour long time ago, and you should stop with that. Really.

[Inventive Software]

You arn't very polite, you can't talk like that to anyone on this forum, I noticed your rude behaviour long time ago, and you should stop with that. Really.

You're treading a fine line between flame-threading, the pair of you. Keep it polite please. ;)

[bob0r]

Anyone an attorney here?
Lets team up and attack!

[bond]

Before this goes any further, I'd like to remind you about forum rule #4. :thanks::stupid:

[DeepBeepMeep]

On a second thought they may not necessarly be dead. They may have shifted entirely to different markets where no H264hardware decoder is available or where hardware decoding is too expensive like PDA or low cost PC.

In addition, Coreavc is still a nice showcase for a CPU decoder and companies like Intel may be interested to acquire such products in order to illustrate the interest of their multicores CPU. If I remember correctly Intel has been advertising a lot on the theme "A CPU capable to handle all the multimedia tasks".

If they followed this path, this means that their customers are now OEM exclusively. Which solves the problem of support because of instead having contacts with multiple customers they have to deal with only one point of contact with an OEM customer.

That's fine with me. Although support was very bad, I can't say personnally I hadn't my money's worth. $15 isn't that much considering what other products cost.

I think this issue is no longer about money, support, or getting the hardware support (which would be useless with the latest graphich cards) it is about respect. A lot of people have been betting on CoreAvc and probably helping it to get better by pointing out bugs, they now have the feeling they have been let down.

Guys, please clarify your stance and for one time tell us what to really expect. If you really can't do that at least release a fixed version of your product. The fixed 1.3 you mentioned was fine for me and seemt to cover all my needs.

Hey Core ! It's about time you show you still care about those who have been with you since the beginning !

[ChronoCross]

You arn't very polite, you can't talk like that to anyone on this forum, I noticed your rude behaviour long time ago, and you should stop with that. Really.

Your one to talk KRP. You've already had one account banned and now your using this other one.

guess none of the mods noticed that your email is akostic which is KRP's real name.

[Shinigami-Sama]

Your one to talk KRP. You've already had one account banned and now your using this other one.

guess none of the mods noticed that your email is akostic which is KRP's real name.

As I recall you've been banned one or more times as well
so can we keep it civil here?

[ChronoCross]

As I recall you've been banned one or more times as well
so can we keep it civil here?

suspended once, banned are two different things.

@b0b0r
So odd your policy on suing. What's the reasoning behind your opinion on how you plan on suing the company?


Edit: I can express my opinion about all the ranting going on in this thread as much as the next person.

[Inventive Software]

Theres expressing your opinion, and being just plain rude. ;)

[ChronoCross]

Theres expressing your opinion, and being just plain rude. ;)

I treat others as they treat me. Practice what you preach please.

[Romario]

Hmmm, strange, very strange. You are very rude, ChronoCross, and you, unfortunately, can't see that. I am very sorry, but others are right about you.

Try to behave little better.

[ChronoCross]

Hmmm, strange, very strange. You are very rude, ChronoCross, and you, unfortunately, can't see that. I am very sorry, but others are right about you.

Try to behave little better.

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=998848#post998848

The above post is just a little tidbit of what mister KRP has always been up to on this forum. Constantly bashing developers and begging for new features. Just click on his profile and look at all of his 200 posts. Pretty much all of them are "when are we going to have this, why isn't this done, you guys suck for not finishing this, give me this"

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=992014#post992014

Here is where he admits to being KRP.

It's something we all knew from the start that these two romario and KRP were the same person.


14) Multiple registrations are prohibited and are grounds for immediate account deletion.

[Inventive Software]

It's almost like you have a personal vendetta against this guy. I'm not fussed by it TBH, it's a good laugh to watch him fight the community! What I don't wanna see is you get striked for being baited by him. ;)

[Romario]

It's almost like you have a personal vendetta against this guy. I'm not fussed by it TBH, it's a good laugh to watch him fight the community! What I don't wanna see is you get striked for being baited by him. ;)

You are right. I bet that Chronocross doesn't have private life at all. And, he is pretty good Corecodec lawyer, I must say.

[Mutant_Fruit]

Can i call for this thread to be closed. It's far outlived it's usefullness. Nothing new is being found out, no new points are being made and its just degenerating into random flames and off topic-ness.

[bob0r]

Back to the topic:

Man i love Matrix 1, 2 and 3 HDDVD, cyberlink really makes it happen for me!

[Yufi]

ignoring the stupid egoclashes...

I see others in this thread have had the same problem I have: 1.3 suddenly stops working, and installing 1.2 doesn't fix it. yet I registered 1.1 and it worked perfectly fine. I noticed that 1.3 only stopped working immediately after I installed a video card driver update (updating the nVidia drivers), so there's a good chance it has something to do with that. I just can't figure out how or why.

[Jay Bee]

Just checked the CoreAVC site for updates: "CoreAVC Sales will be back in a few days !". This has been there for one or two months now hasn't it? I guess this is the end.

I can't imagine that such a small company with such a niche product can afford to close their shop for so long. :( Maybe they should have listened more to their customers...

[lilhobo]

so they havent fixed 1.3 yet??

[JohnnyFu]

Just checked the CoreAVC site for updates: "CoreAVC Sales will be back in a few days !". This has been there for one or two months now hasn't it? I guess this is the end.

I can't imagine that such a small company with such a niche product can afford to close their shop for so long. :( Maybe they should have listened more to their customers...

They made a deal with Joost, that means alot of money for them.

[DigitalDeviant]

ignoring the stupid egoclashes...

I see others in this thread have had the same problem I have: 1.3 suddenly stops working, and installing 1.2 doesn't fix it. yet I registered 1.1 and it worked perfectly fine. I noticed that 1.3 only stopped working immediately after I installed a video card driver update (updating the nVidia drivers), so there's a good chance it has something to do with that. I just can't figure out how or why.

Ok, now to try to use this thread productively. I haven't heard any problems with with drivers. Mine was an issue with the serial # in my account and I think some people were having problems with installing Vista.

You should open a ticket through Core's portal. If that gets ignored, write a few flaming posts on their boards until you get someone's attention. Unfortunately, that's what I had to resort to but it got BlackSun's attention and my problem was resolved in a day after waiting over 6 weeks doing things the nice way.

[Jay Bee]

so they havent fixed 1.3 yet??
No.

They made a deal with Joost, that means alot of money for them.

I see. I just read the Wikipedia article on Joost. So basically it's like TVU player except legal and not free? If it works out that would indeed mean big money for CoreCodec. Maybe they could even put some resources towards fixing CoreAVC then.

[BetaBoy]

Been staying out of the flame war.... alot has been going on... Unlike what Jay Bee has been stating.. for those that need 1.3 and have purchased it we have fixed their account to be able to download 1.3 (except for DD it seems till Blacksun helped). Also, alot has gone on with the codec and what/how we are dealing with our growth now and the future and we hope that these steps (while hard to deal with atm) will ensure for better products and support with almost realtime updates being able to be pushed to the clients as a major goal.

On purchasing.... with the current changes almost complete we are expecting purchasing to continue late next week. I will post an update when its back up.

I am also glad to say that with alot of hard work by our devel team that after the next release that CoreAVC Professional for Windows we will also include CoreAVC QT Professional Edition (for Quicktime) and we will also launch CoreAVC QT for Mac OS X.

[JohnnyFu]

Been staying out of the flame war.... alot has been going on... Unlike what Jay Bee has been stating.. for those that need 1.3 and have purchased it we have fixed their account to be able to download 1.3 (except for DD it seems till Blacksun helped). Also, alot has gone on with the codec and what/how we are dealing with our growth now and the future and we hope that these steps (while hard to deal with atm) will ensure for better products and support with almost realtime updates being able to be pushed to the clients as a major goal.

On purchasing.... with the current changes almost complete we are expecting purchasing to continue late next week. I will post an update when its back up.

I am also glad to say that with alot of hard work by our devel team that after the next release that CoreAVC Professional for Windows will also include CoreAVC QT Professional Edition for Quicktime and we will also launch CoreAVC QT for Mac OS X.


Not a single word on the GPU thing..... sad....
However... at least you said something.

[Hans Ohlo]

On purchasing.... with the current changes almost complete we are expecting purchasing to continue late next week. I will post an update when its back up.

good to hear from you! good to know that _something_ is going on... but seeing how 'tomorrow' turned out _please_ do not tell us that something will be ready next week, because we all know how this will end!

[Hans Ohlo]

good to hear from you! good to know that _something_ is going on... but seeing how 'tomorrow' turned out _please_ do not tell us that something will be ready next week, because we all know how this will end!
now and who proves me/us right again. man, this is not even funny anymore!

[foxyshadis]

Sorry, "made by the same company" isn't enough justification. Moved to Possible CoreAAC Bug (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=126710).

[AKarpo]

now and who proves me/us right again. man, this is not even funny anymore!

At this point, I would have to agree with you...

[ChronoCross]

now and who proves me/us right again. man, this is not even funny anymore!

A true troll.

[Episode]

@ChronoCross, if you don't have anything else to say other than insulting people, don't post at all.

[ChronoCross]

@ChronoCross, if you don't have anything else to say other than insulting people, don't post at all.

same to you.

[Guest]

Guys, knock it off or strikes will follow. Thank you.

[Romario]

@ChronoCross, if you don't have anything else to say other than insulting people, don't post at all.

You are my true leader. Respect.

[Guest]

You are my true leader. Respect. Struck for rule 16.

[idiotism]

so...?? when is 1.3.0.1 coming?? the next week u said on 24th May 2007 09:21 happened a while ago.....

in fact 3 weeks ago........

[bmnot]

Apparently, version 1.4 is in development (http://www.corecodec.com/forums/index.php?topic=207.0)

[Inventive Software]

Oh great, and will this require ANOTHER payment or is it free to those who forked out for activation for 1.2 and 1.3?

[DigitalDeviant]

Um, all that post says is that they now plan to offer a free trial version version sometime after they release 1.4, not that they are working on 1.4. All 1.x upgrades are free for those who've already purchased it.

[JohnnyFu]

A missing person has been sighted in the Republic of Nauru today.
http://www.wdr.de/themen/kultur/rundfunk/schmidt/_img/061213/_img/1_400h.jpg

We are bumping the next release to 1.4... there are many reasons for the delay in bringing back up purchasing... none-of-which I can discuss in public at this time. Just know that there is alot of devel going on behind the scenes here.

[bob0r]

Yup Yup

This is a drastic positive message from me:
CoreAVC + Haali's splitter as they are now, can play:

- ALL European H.264 streams currently available, this included Ateme's LUXE TV H.264 MBAFF+Spatial direct mode stream. And ofcourse all PAFF-interlaced streams.

- Some USA Dish Network H.264 streams i have tested are:
ABC/CBS/NBS/FOX H.264 broadcasts, though ugly as some are, they are decoded perfectly by CoreAVC

- CoreAVC also works perfect in DVB Viewer (GE), all AR issues are fixed, and with the 1088 to 1080p cropping feature every program can be watched directly

- So far as i tested all H.264 from .m2ts (bluray) and H.264 .evo (hddvd) streams work fine, so the video issue has been fixed (long time ago)

- All new x264 encodes using revision 663+ do not show any blocking anymore. (this was an x264 issue, not a coreavc issue)

- Also color output by coreavc is now working perfectly, where other decoders do not detect the color input, and coreavc does, it may appear BBC-HD looks different on coreavc than any other decoder, but in fact this is the second case of CoreAVC being better coded, where others just ignore certain aspects.

These are all conclusions i can make because i have tested this all myself.

So the product itself seems to be working perfectly, only the systems (and people?) around it seem to make it look kinda.... yes i think - retarded - is a good word :p

I am using a post 1.3 crap version that was online..... so all they have to do is: RELEASE IT!

[Dark Shikari]

Yup Yup

This is a drastic positive message from me:
CoreAVC + Haali's splitter as they are now, can play:

- ALL European H.264 streams currently available, this included Ateme's LUXE TV H.264 MBAFF+Spatial direct mode stream. And ofcourse all PAFF-interlaced streams.

- Some USA Dish Network H.264 streams i have tested are:
ABC/CBS/NBS/FOX H.264 broadcasts, though ugly as some are, they are decoded perfectly by CoreAVC

- CoreAVC also works perfect in DVB Viewer (GE), all AR issues are fixed, and with the 1088 to 1080p cropping feature every program can be watched directly

- So far as i tested all H.264 from .m2ts (bluray) and H.264 .evo (hddvd) streams work fine, so the video issue has been fixed (long time ago)

- All new x264 encodes using revision 663+ do not show any blocking anymore. (this was an x264 issue, not a coreavc issue)

- Also color output by coreavc is now working perfectly, where other decoders do not detect the color input, and coreavc does, it may appear BBC-HD looks different on coreavc than any other decoder, but in fact this is the second case of CoreAVC being better coded, where others just ignore certain aspects.

These are all conclusions i can make because i have tested this all myself.

So the product itself seems to be working perfectly, only the systems (and people?) around it seem to make it look kinda.... yes i think - retarded - is a good word :p

I am using a post 1.3 crap version that was online..... so all they have to do is: RELEASE IT!
I'm using 1.3 here also; CoreAVC is amazing and I have no idea why CoreCodec would be dumb enough to not let people buy it; most people would probably pay more than the current price, easily!

I can play a 1920x1200 High Profile video (CABAC + deblocking + 8x8 transform + 6 reference frames) at full speed on my Core 2 Duo... on battery mode, at 1Ghz, without noticable slowdown on any other tasks, or any stuttering. :p

[BetaBoy]

bob0r... OMG ;-) thx for the kind words... It has been very hard not pushing the latest CoreAVC out to the public to sell sooner then everyone would like. To current customers, we are resetting the accounts of 1.3 when they submit a support ticket ( http://support.corecodec.com ) till the next public version is released.

While I cannot say alot to the public at this point... what I can say is that there is alot going on here in regards to the CorePlayer Platform (Mobile and Pro) which obviously includes all the varous aspects of CoreAVC (and CoreSVC) including CoreAVC QuickTime for OS X and Windows.

So when will it be out? Thats TBD atm... but we are the closest we have been yet (the next version will be bumped a version number to v1.4 for all the work that has gone into it)... and yes dorothy, in 1.4.x there will be a 30-day demo available;-)

[deets]

can i put in a request :)

could you make a 64 bit version. Im not asking just for the sake of it. As you might know, MS restricted the spdif pass through in vista 64 to 64 bit media players. The 64 bit media player must use 64 bit codecs, so currently we cant use coreavc and have spdif output!

if you guys compiled a 64 bit version for vista 64, this would be fantastic. Im sure more and more people will be going to vista 64 as time goes on.

[JohnnyFu]

I still have no doubt that CoreAVC is the most potential h.264 decoder out there. Even if I was sometimes a little angry about the lack of GPU support, I'm glad for your small company about the Joost Deal.
And since I got a new machine I don't care about the GPU support anymore.
I'm also going to buy a PV2 (PureVideo HD/2) video card at the end of the year, hopefully cyberlink runs fine on x264 encodes then, or maybe even coreavc supports PV2 sometimes, who knows... :)

Looking forward to 1.4 !


-Btw, what is the meaning of TBD ?


-Another (off)topic, I got a problem, please see the screenshots below. I don't know how to explain the problem with the correct words so just have look on the screenshots. I hope one of you guys can help me out here.

Note, please save the pics and view them with the windows default picture viewer.

This is what it is supposed to look:
frame_saved_as_bitmap (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/frame_saved_as_bitmap.png) (via File/Save Image as..., MPC)
I have no idea why but open this pic in Firefox/IE makes it look bad like the four below.... Totally weird... just to be safe here is the uncompressed version (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/frame_saved_as_bitmap.bmp) (edit: uh.. even the .bmp looks bad in Firefox/IE.. strange...)

BAD
prinscreen_1 (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/printscreen_1.png)
prinscreen_2 (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/printscreen_2.png)
prinscreen_3 (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/printscreen_5.png)
prinscreen_4 (http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/printscreen_6.png)

This is a BluRay x264 encode. As you can see it looks bad using Haali and VMR9, it looks good (like the frame_saved_as_bitmap) using Overlay Mixer or VMR7, I'm sorry I was not able to capture screenshots using these renderers.
The problem is that there is no subtitle support via Overlay Mixer or VMR7, and VMR7 renderless looks like the printscreen_2 pic.
However, I can use VLC and it looks good and the subtitles work fine, but I don't like VLC.

[Eretria-chan]

-Btw, what is the meaning of TBD ?

To be determined...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TBD

[Bigmango]

-Btw, what is the meaning of TBD ?


Looking at the past months I'd say "To Be Delayed" :p

[bob0r]

@JohnnyFu

The CoreAVC one is correct.
As i stated before, only CoreAVC detects input color, and sets output color correctly.

What i have done is force PC-level on all input and ouput, it may be bad, but i dont get grey bars when they should be black! Don't know if this feature is in the "bad" 1.3 version, but its perfect in the upcoming 1.4 version.

[Maxiuca]

can play:
- ALL European H.264 streams currently available, this included Ateme's LUXE TV H.264 MBAFF+Spatial direct mode stream. And ofcourse all PAFF-interlaced streams.


Not quite, it has major issues with playing Discovery HD streams from Premiere. Cyberlink h.264 plays them flawlessly. And I can use Cyberlink's decoder with AltDVB (I don't like DVBViever) and I can BUY it, whereas CoreAVC can be only stolen at the moment, which is a shame cause it was worth it's price when it was available. But I wish the CoreCodec team all the best. Seems these problems that BetaBoy is talking about are rather legal/organizational then technical.

[ChronoCross]

Not quite, it has major issues with playing Discovery HD streams from Premiere. Cyberlink h.264 plays them flawlessly. And I can use Cyberlink's decoder with AltDVB (I don't like DVBViever) and I can BUY it, whereas CoreAVC can be only stolen at the moment, which is a shame cause it was worth it's price when it was available. But I wish the CoreCodec team all the best. Seems these problems that BetaBoy is talking about are rather legal/organizational then technical.

he was actually talking about the beta version that he's testing...not the 1.2 or buggy 1.3 version

[Maxiuca]

he was actually talking about the beta version that he's testing...not the 1.2 or buggy 1.3 version
Ok, I was talking about the "buggy" 1.3 version (still, it works much better for me than 1.2).
In that case I hope 1.4 will be realesed soon.

[JohnnyFu]

@bob0r

It's not about the color. Don't you see the blocking ? I don't think it is a decoder problem since it's ok when I use VM7 or Overlay.

Can you confirm that this http://under.urban-souls.net/pics/frame_saved_as_bitmap.png looks different on your machine using Firefox/IE <> windows default picture viewer ?

edit: ok... forget it, i just found out that the problem even occurs on MPEG2 dvd's, something is wrong with my machine, I'm almost sure it has something to do with the nvidia drivers since I played with them last week.

edit: omg... I found the solution, the drivers color quality was set to 16bit :D

[DeepBeepMeep]

bob0r... OMG ;-) thx for the kind words... It has been very hard not pushing the latest CoreAVC out to the public to sell sooner then everyone would like. To current customers, we are resetting the accounts of 1.3 when they submit a support ticket ( http://support.corecodec.com ) till the next public version is released.

While I cannot say alot to the public at this point... what I can say is that there is alot going on here in regards to the CorePlayer Platform (Mobile and Pro) which obviously includes all the varous aspects of CoreAVC (and CoreSVC) including CoreAVC QuickTime for OS X and Windows.

So when will it be out? Thats TBD atm... but we are the closest we have been yet (the next version will be bumped a version number to v1.4 for all the work that has gone into it)... and yes dorothy, in 1.4.x there will be a 30-day demo available;-)

Could please you just put back on line in the meantime the "fixed" 1.3 that Bobor obviously got (-;. It contains the color space fix which is the feature I have been needing since v1.1... Switching between configurations to force CoreAvc to ignore the colorspace levels is a pain... Thanks

[bob0r]

@Maxiuca
To confirm, i have captured DISCOVERY.HD.Astra.1G.19.2E.10.jul.2007.ts (and PREMIERE.HD.Astra.1G.19.2E.10.jul.2007.ts for that matter), both files are playing flawless

http://x264.nl/h.264.samples/10.jul.2007/ all play fine.

[Jay Bee]

he was actually talking about the beta version that he's testing...not the 1.2 or buggy 1.3 version

Is it available for download?

[ChronoCross]

Is it available for download?

nope.

[JohnnyFu]

I've tested a recently build today and I can confirm most of bob0r's testings.

Looking forward to the final.

[BetaBoy]

By request... here is the complete description list of the CoreAVC Professional Options. We will be calling it 1.5 and are pushing for a release soon (hence me posting this).

Since it is CoreAVC QuickTime that is delaying us (for the most part), we will push its release till a later version. So with that, here is the description of the options.


CoreAVC Professional 1.5 'options'

Accept Input
This setting controls which DirectShow Media Types the decoder accepts on input. Uncheck only if you are troubleshooting problems with CoreAVC incorrectly decoding some variant of H.264, or want to use another decoder for it.

Deblocking
This setting controls how the deblocking step of H.264 specification is executed by the decoder. Deblocking is a complex process that consumes significant processing resources. If your machine is not fast enough, you might want to turn off deblocking for some frames, but it will degrade visual quality.

Standard deblocking - do deblocking exactly as specified by H.264
Skip b-frame deblocking - skip deblocking step when decoding B-frames.
Skip all deblocking - do not perform deblocking at all.

Deinterlacing
This setting specifies how interlaced material is handled by the decoder.

Software deinterlacing - the decoder outputs one deinterlaced frame for each pair of fields.
Software double framerate - the decoder outputs one deinterlaced frame for each input field.
DirectShow deinterlacing - the decoder does not deinterlace video, but flags it as interlaced where appropriate, so Video Renderer filter can deinterlace it.
No deinterlacing - the decoder does not deinterlace video, and flags it as progressive on output.

Aggressive deinterlacing
This option determines how the decoder detects interlacing in source stream.

Off - use only picture timing SEI and POC numbers to detect interlaced video. Unfortunately not all encoders properly flag material as interlaced.
On - in addition to SEI and POC, assumes source is interlaced if any interlaced coding tools are used in encoding the frame (MBAFF, PAFF).

Crop 1088 to 1080
H.264 encoded video size is always a multiple of 16, and sequences that are 1080 pixels high are encoded as 1088 padded at the bottom. Also H.264 specifications provides a set of cropping parameters to signal that parts of the encoded picture are not important and should not be displayed. Some H.264 encoders fail to specify cropping parameters when encoding 1080 video.

Off - do not crop video.
On - when input video is exactly 1088 pixels high, crop 8 pixels off the bottom.

Force VMR AR correction
This option can be used if you are working with the decoder outside the normal player environment.

Off - does not change VMR settings.
On - instructs VMR filter to maintain aspect ration of the video that it displays. Normally this AR correction is the responsibility of a video player. This option should normally be off.

Color space output
This setting determines the preferred output color space. The decoder tries each format in order specified until it is accepted by the Video Renderer filter.

Levels
H.264 specification allows two variants of Luminance range encoding. The default one, so called TV levels, sets the black level at 16 and white level at 235, and allows blacker-than-black and whiter-than-white levels. Another option is full-range luminance, so called PC levels, it has black at 0, and white at 255. H.264 streams by default use TV levels, but a full-range flag may be specified that signals PC levels use in the stream. Change these options only when you are troubleshooting incorrectly encoded streams, or use a misbehaving Video Renderer.

Input levels
TV (16-235) - always assume the stream uses TV levels
PC (0-255) - always assume the stream uses PC levels
Autodetect - use the fullrange flag in the stream to determine Luminance range
Output levels, this also affects conversion to RGB color space when it is done by the decoder.

TV (16-235) - assume the Video Renderer expects TV levels
PC (0-255) - assume the Video Renderer expects PC levels
Autodetect - use PC levels when VMR is used as a Video Renderer, and TV levels for all others.





I have updated my first post...

[Guest]

Vaporware. Stop teasing us.

[Kurtnoise]

Vaporware. Stop teasing us.
I'd say the same thing about DGAVCDec and the containers support. So, I think it's really a childish behaviour from you, especially as a moderator. Although I'm not really surprised after all...:rolleyes:

[BetaBoy]

Kurtnoise13.. its fine... wierd coming from neuron2 I thought but understandable. While third party confirmation like 'bob0r' is nice for 1.5, I am just trying to be proactive here prior to our new version being released.

[Guest]

I haven't advertised anything about container support, and continually remind people that it supports ES only. Do I have any plans for it? It depends on time; I'm not making any promises.

I stared at "purchasing will be back in a few days" for a very long time and am still unable to buy this Core codec. For me, then, it is vaporware. And I'm entitled to express my opinion about it.

[bob0r]

I agree with BetaBoy and neuron2, the solution is simple:

:devil: _JUST_ _FUNKING_ _RELEASE_ _IT_ :devil:

[Kurtnoise]

First of all sorry for the off-topic but I can't reply to "the moderation team". So, here is my response.

Just to be clear between you and me...The warning which has been send, comes from the whole moderation team or just Neuron2 himself ?

I'm entitled to express my opinion about it.
Keep in mind that you're not the only one here to express an opinion about this subject (with all the respect I can say)...otherwise it's a sad and strange behaviour.

I'm also a moderator on a french forum. So, I know that sometimes it's not easy. All I can say, it's that sometimes you use your rights against the others "simple" users with a too strong partiality.

[Guest]

You're entitled to your opinions. But you can't insult me because you don't like *my* opinions. If you wish to discuss my moderating actions, please send me a PM about it. Thank you.

[Shinigami-Sama]

@ 20th April 2007, 09:55
It's all academic, because you still cannot buy it!


@ 20th July 2007, 19:57
Vaporware. Stop teasing us.

4 months so far so I have to agree with neuron about it being vapourware

as much as I'd like to support core about this I gave up long ago telling people about it because of this.

[DocAliG]

Fighting my fears to ask this, because I don't want to (re) activate the storm / thunder and getting people angry.

** Disclosure ** Warning **
This is a simple question, with nothing in background, just to know.
** End disclosure ** End warning **

Betaboy, when do you think CoreAVC ENcoder will/would be ready ?

Thanks

[bmnot]

What exactly is "Skip b-frame deblocking". Is it in between no deblocking and full deblocking? or something else?

[Shinigami-Sama]

What exactly is "Skip b-frame deblocking". Is it in between no deblocking and full deblocking? or something else?

looks like it deblocks both I and P frames, as b-frame processing is slow
as long as you don't have a large string of b-frames you shouldn't be able to notice a whole lot

so yeahs is 2/3 the way to full deblocking

[Gabriel_Bouvigne]

What exactly is "Skip b-frame deblocking". Is it in between no deblocking and full deblocking? or something else?
This is an option to not deblock B frames. B frames deblocking is not more time consuming than deblocking any other frame, but as B frames are notoften used as reference, it allows to skip deblocking on those frames without propagating any mismatch to further frames (which would happen if you do not deblock frames used as a reference).

Side note: it would be way more bullet-proof to skip deblocking on non-ref frames rather than on B frames (B frames can be used as a reference, and I/P can be non referenced frames).

[foxyshadis]

I'm fairly sure that's actually what Core does, but "Skip non-reference b-frame deblocking" is quite a mouthful for a configuration box.

[Kurtnoise]

Does anybody is able to download/purchase the 1.5.0.0 (http://www.coreavc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=1) release yet ?

From my account, it's still the 1.3.0.0.



edit: wrong versioning I guess because the filter has been created today...

[Guest]

Does anybody is able to download/purchase the 1.5.0.0 (http://www.coreavc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=1) release yet ? I'm not able to download or purchase anything. There is a page called Download/Purchase but there are no links for downloading and purchasing on it. It appears to be vaporware, and they're still teasing us. :)

[Kurtnoise]

You need to create an account to download something...

Core Account >> http://portal.coreforge.org/

[pankov]

Kurtnoise13,
I do have an account, but I still don't see where I can download the new version. Can you guide us?
I suppose it's all my fault but it was so long ago when I downloaded something from there that I forgot
;)

[ChronoCross]

I don't even think it's released. Just the changelog is up.

[Guest]

You need to create an account to download something...

Core Account >> http://portal.coreforge.org/ That's vaporware too. I created an account and logged in. It responded with a screen asking me to register my purchase, which I haven't made yet, as that is my primary goal, to simply purchase the product. Then I navigated back to the download/purchase page (while logged in), and there still are no links for downloading or purchasing.

But thank you for your suggestion. Sharing is caring.

[BetaBoy]

changelog was pushed because we are testing 1.5 right now with some current users of CoreAVC / Core Account system and they wanted to know what was new. Neuron2 we are working on 'hiding' the 'register my purchase' for only incoming purchases.

[Guest]

Why don't you remove the download/purchase page until it is actually possible to download and/or purchase the product? Or put a notice on it saying something like:

"The product is not yet available for purchase. Please check back periodically to check the status. Thank you."

And why can't I become a "current user"?

[Shinigami-Sama]

changelog was pushed because we are testing 1.5 right now with some current users of CoreAVC / Core Account system and they wanted to know what was new. Neuron2 we are working on 'hiding' the 'register my purchase' for only incoming purchases.

if I were you guys I'd seriously fire my current web dev team and get a new one, along with your marketing team. I'd like to be able to buy it sometime before even a PPC can handle 1080p

[DeepBeepMeep]

Come one betaboy! Get this version out. Its number keep changing... It was supposed to be first 1.3 then 1.4 and now 1.5. I have got the feeling you are going to announce it is again to be postponed and magically become 1.6 for our own good.

It is very frustrating: I have reported the issue with the colorspace conversion around the first release of coreavc which was more than one year ago ! A long time later around the failed 1.3 release we have learnt it is an (unwanted) feature of coreavc which is the only decoder that takes into account a flag which is obviously not supported by most AVC encoders.

During all this time people like me had to use postprocessors such as ffdshow to counterbalance this unwanted effect! You had plenty of time to fix this issue and the others that have been reported. And now you delay, you delay, and so on.

Obviously you underestimate the negative effect on your future sales of pissed off people like me that are certainly not spreading nice words about you, it should have been so simple to release this version...

[Kurtnoise]

I do have an account, but I still don't see where I can download the new version. Can you guide us?
I suppose it's all my fault but it was so long ago when I downloaded something from there that I forgot
;)
1/ After your log in, in the 2nd tab, select sales->purchases :
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/5264/coreavc01ql4.th.png (http://img254.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavc01ql4.png)

2/ Click on the last order you have in the list.

3/ Then click on the download link...that's all.
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/9172/coreavc022es3.th.png (http://img254.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavc022es3.png)

but it works only for people who have already purchased something I guess. Anyway, we still wait for BetaBoy to announce the official release.

[deets]

sigh if only for some competition to get them to get their act together, this is pretty embarrassing to see the sales back in a couple of days, but nothing for months.

wonder how many sales been lost to piracy

[Dark Shikari]

sigh if only for some competition to get them to get their act together, this is pretty embarrassing to see the sales back in a couple of days, but nothing for months.

wonder how many sales been lost to piracy
Well the worst thing about this for the developers of CoreAVC is that because of the complete failure of their sales department, it has become the de facto standard on many video-related websites to pirate it, even on sites that otherwise are completely opposed to piracy. I see links thrown around to 1.2 and 1.3 all over the place, and many major codec packs even include it.

Basically CoreAVC has told the world "we make great software, please pirate it, because you can't buy it." And they listened.

[pankov]

Kurtnoise13,
thanks for the quick guide. With your help I was able to download the installation file but it seams it's the old one (1.3.0.0) :(
I guess we'll have to wait more
:(
let's hope it's not as long as the last time.

[Shinigami-Sama]

Well the worst thing about this for the developers of CoreAVC is that because of the complete failure of their sales department, it has become the de facto standard on many video-related websites to pirate it, even on sites that otherwise are completely opposed to piracy. I see links thrown around to 1.2 and 1.3 all over the place, and many major codec packs even include it.

Basically CoreAVC has told the world "we make great software, please pirate it, because you can't buy it." And they listened.
there were actually a couple copies of it on the FTP I hosted for here, I check it periodically and removed it to be nice, should probably check again soon

[Jay Bee]

Is 1.5 out yet? Videohelp thinks it is: http://www.videohelp.com/tools/CoreAVC

[Maxiuca]

Is 1.5 out yet? Videohelp thinks it is: http://www.videohelp.com/tools/CoreAVC
CoreCodec also claims it's already "out":

http://www.coreavc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=1

[ChronoCross]

Is 1.5 out yet? Videohelp thinks it is: http://www.videohelp.com/tools/CoreAVC

No it's not. It's in the final prep stage.

CoreCodec also claims it's already "out":

http://www.coreavc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=1

That's the public changelog to let everyone know what progress is being made.

[wiak]

is it just me or do the changelog for 1.5 look like 1.2?
all tose options that is listed are in 1.2 :confused:

[HowlerX]

This weekend... hell freezes over! (http://www.corecodec.com/forums/index.php?topic=89.msg2007#msg2007)

Apparently, version 1.5 de-vaporizes this weekend! According to Betaboy, they've been having problems with the DRM-scheme...er... “installer,” thus the current delay in releasing.

Being a legal owner of CoreAVC since late Sept., I hope they do manage to release this version soon-ish.

For the record, I've encoded and watched probably hundreds (guesstimating here) of x264-encoded content with CoreAVC since I bought it and I really do have faith in these guys despite their numerous delays in releasing 1.3...er... 1.5.

CoreAVC gave my aging P4 a reason to go on computing, instead of ending up in a recycling bin.

[trueimage]

is it out yet? ;)

[ACrowley]

is it out yet? ;)

No. not out...

I believe it only when i can download it !:rolleyes:

Will 1.5 fix the ugly Macroblocking on some x264 ?
I think so

Fix: Deblocking with extreme settings fixed

[Jay Bee]

This weekend... hell freezes over! (http://www.corecodec.com/forums/index.php?topic=89.msg2007#msg2007)


Oh dear, here goes.

http://xs218.xs.to/xs218/07316/f5.jpg

I just hope it's true this time. And I wouldn't worry about the installer. I'm sure EDGE will fix it. :)

[trenskow]

Hi all

I just found out that coreavc exist today, and naturally wanted to rty it out right away. But... is there no official download from there webpage i can try? I cant find it on their webpage. Or are they waiting until they have a new release.
I really really wanna try it out :-)

Regards

[Dark Shikari]

Hi all

I just found out that coreavc exist today, and naturally wanted to rty it out right away. But... is there no official download from there webpage i can try? I cant find it on their webpage. Or are they waiting until they have a new release.
I really really wanna try it out :-)

RegardsSo far its basically vaporware.

There are many codec packs that contain it, just google around. There's even one on free-codecs.com and such...

[trueimage]

Vaporware?? I've been using it since last Nov

[ChronoCross]

Vaporware?? I've been using it since last Nov

these guys just talk about what they don't know. Ignore them. Coreavc should be legally purchased and not used from these "codec packs" like some of our above associates should have you to believe.

[Dark Shikari]

these guys just talk about what they don't know. Ignore them. Coreavc should be legally purchased and not used from these "codec packs" like some of our above associates should have you to believe.
It should be legally purchased, too bad last I saw CoreCodec won't let you :rolleyes:

I'll quote my earlier post again:

Well the worst thing about this for the developers of CoreAVC is that because of the complete failure of their sales department, it has become the de facto standard on many video-related websites to pirate it, even on sites that otherwise are completely opposed to piracy. I see links thrown around to 1.2 and 1.3 all over the place, and many major codec packs even include it.

Basically CoreAVC has told the world "we make great software, please pirate it, because you can't buy it." And they listened.
You can't tell people to buy what isn't being sold.

[Disabled]

It is vaporware for all ppl who not already bought it or use an illegal version. Youre not able to buy it since months and I think its a lot better for CoreCodec, before they get more paying customers they can spoof.
GPU support is Vaporvare, the new version is still vaporvar...

I'd not recommend anyone to buy it right now until they start to be honest to their customers and start to care about them.

[BetaBoy]

CoreAVC 1.5 has been released to our current users. To download the updated:

- Go to : http://portal.coreforge.org
- Select Sales > Purchases'
- Select your Order #
- On the right side select 'Download URL'

Once we get verification that the remaining installer work we did with Vista has been resolved. We will bring up purchasing again. Additionally.... once purchasing is back up we will then include an offline activation method.

[skal]

i'm curious about what CoreSVC is...
Any clue? corecodec.com mentions it, but there's no description.
Just an unusual word attached: "encoder".

skal

[mitsubishi]

Never heard of CoreSVC, but SVC is an extension to AVC allowing heterogeneous distribution. i.e. One encode can be decoded at different quality levels.

[CruNcher]

@skal
it stands for Scalable Video Codec and as mitsubishi said a addition to H.264 and is good for what the name says it scales with the available Bandwith (so streaming optimized), reference encoder is released for longer time now.

[Jay Bee]

Thx for the release. Tried a few test files. No more problems for me.

[BetaBoy]

Any Vista users try 1.5 yet?

[Gnerma]

I'm on Vista Business. 1.5 installs BUT it did not detect my custom install directory which is "C:\Program Files\codecs\CoreAVC" instead of the default. I entered it manually and the installer seemed to update the previous 1.3 install fine.

[bmnot]

When will I be able to buy it?

[BetaBoy]

When will I be able to buy it?
see below


Once we get verification that the remaining installer work we did with Vista has been resolved. We will bring up purchasing again. Additionally.... once purchasing is back up we will then include an offline activation method.

[BetaBoy]

I'm on Vista Business. 1.5 installs BUT it did not detect my custom install directory which is "C:\Program Files\codecs\CoreAVC" instead of the default. I entered it manually and the installer seemed to update the previous 1.3 install fine.

Nor will it (by design) as each version is independant of the last.

[andybno1]

yeh vista user, I got unable to read product ID. please contact support@corecodec.com with error VI82

[BetaBoy]

You logged in as an admin?

For error VI82 - The installer is unable to read your Microsoft(R) Windows product ID. Typically, this is caused by a permissions problem. Please log in as a user with administrative privileges, and re-run the installer.

[bob0r]

http://x264.nl/coreavc1.5.duke.jpg

[BetaBoy]

Nice abs ;-)... well we have identified a new MS Vista update that may break Vista installs of CoreAVC like a lil beayach. Stay tuned...

[BetaBoy]

Confirmed... Vista Sucks /me says that with nothing but love for MS ;-/

[andybno1]

You logged in as an admin?

For error VI82 - The installer is unable to read your Microsoft(R) Windows product ID. Typically, this is caused by a permissions problem. Please log in as a user with administrative privileges, and re-run the installer.

I'm the only user of the PC and have full rights, I have also tried the run as administrator option with right click and still the same

[ACrowley]

"So far i can" see at the Moment the deblocking Bug is fixed in some x264 encodes
I had these ugly Blocking in some of my x264 encodes in Scenes with Rain etc...with 1.5.0.0 no Blocking anymore :-)

EDIT ! :
No, in my Testsample was no Blocking with 1.3.0.0 too.

This sample has the "CoreAVC Blocking"
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=BF2IX6WU

@CoreCodec (betaBoy) it should be fixed in 1.5.0.0 ?
But it is NOT fixed in 1.5.0.0 !

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/781/15qe6.th.png (http://img186.imageshack.us/my.php?image=15qe6.png)

It was the most important Bugfix for me (and for the most people i know)....very very sad

[oddball]

Confirmed. CoreAVC is *BROKE*. ffdshow and Cyberlink's codec have no problem with this x264 encode.

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/8471/coreavcbugiy4.th.jpg (http://img257.imageshack.us/my.php?image=coreavcbugiy4.jpg)

See at bottom of image. Blocks. It looks worse during playback. I get LARGE areas of blocking and mess. It seems to occur during fast motion scenes.

[bob0r]

@ACrowley
@oddball

Are those samples made with x264 BEFORE revision 663?

r663 | pengvado | 2007-06-28 23:26:21 +0200 (Thu, 28 Jun 2007) | 2 lines

limit vertical motion vectors to +/-512, since some decoders actually depend on that limit.

If so, there is your problem, and solution.

[bakerpr]

I cuold not get core 1.3 and now 1.5 to work with dvbviewer.
Is this a known issue or has anybody got it working?

[ACrowley]

@ACrowley
@oddball

Are those samples made with x264 BEFORE revision 663?

r663 | pengvado | 2007-06-28 23:26:21 +0200 (Thu, 28 Jun 2007) | 2 lines

limit vertical motion vectors to +/-512, since some decoders actually depend on that limit.

If so, there is your problem, and solution.

i use rev 667 (aq patched)

I know ,my last latest encodes seems to be fine with CoreAVC

But "However", thats not the point imho!

The only Solution can be a finally working CoreAVC Decoder, so much Release Delays etc..cant be true that nothing is fixed, Sorry.
Other Decoders are working perfect with it, even with freeware. so CoreAVC is the Problem!

[Manao]

CoreAVC isn't doing anything wrong by not decoding properly a video stream with too long motion vectors, since the H264/AVC standard specifies vectors should be less than 512 pixels long ( though the bitstream syntax allow them to be larger ).

Now, though such a restriction makes perfect sense for hardware decoder, it's silly for a software one. It would be easy to change the decoder in order to support large vectors, but there is nothing compelling them to do it. After all, x264, afaik, was the only one generating too big motion vectors, it was due to some very rarely used parameters ( usually, aq or cqm ), and it doesn't do it anymore, so...

[geoffman]

Any Vista users try 1.5 yet?


Seems to be working fine for me so far on ultimate.

[ACrowley]

CoreAVC isn't doing anything wrong by not decoding properly a video stream with too long motion vectors, since the H264/AVC standard specifies vectors should be less than 512 pixels long ( though the bitstream syntax allow them to be larger ).

Now, though such a restriction makes perfect sense for hardware decoder, it's silly for a software one. It would be easy to change the decoder in order to support large vectors, but there is nothing compelling them to do it. After all, x264, afaik, was the only one generating too big motion vectors, it was due to some very rarely used parameters ( usually, aq or cqm ), and it doesn't do it anymore, so...


yes, i understand it :)

I only want to say that other decoders have no Problems with such large vectors..thats the Point for me

So, with builds above 663 it should be fixed, even with aq

[MacGyver2k]

coreavc 1.5.0.0 works for me with dvbviewer - 1.3 didn't. just when i am using a directshow-deinterlacer dvbviewer crashes sometimes.
and black = grey on my pc when input and output is set on auto-detection.

[bob0r]

I cuold not get core 1.3 and now 1.5 to work with dvbviewer.
Is this a known issue or has anybody got it working?

CoreAVC 1.5 works here with dvbviewer 3.6.1.20
However, the way dvbviewer (and altdvb also) handle directshow filters.... well isn't optimal i guess.

However.... in this case... Premiere-HD and BBC-HD both work fine with CoreAVC 1.5.
The video however does not nearly play as fast/smooth as the same video captured to a .ts

Cyberlink's H.264 decoder that comes with version 7.3 (build 2911 is good) still works best with dvbviewer..... but powerdvd comes with the dvb-s2 card.

[bob0r]

yup x264 revision 663+ should all be fine, blockwise.

--

grey = black i have the same problem, blame nvidia mostly.

Anyways, when you select tv on input and output, you get the most vivid colors and black is black....

Ofcourse use MPC (media player classic) + Haali's Video Render (Options>Playback>Output for playback :))

[oddball]

BetaBoy can you add support for non-compliant large vectors anyway? I have a couple of problematic encodes and don't have the source anymore to 'fix' them.

Thanks.

[Jay Bee]

The video however does not nearly play as fast/smooth as the same video captured to a .ts

Hmm, does this mean I can't use CoreAVC for HDTV? Or only that I need a slightly faster CPU? I was planning on getting a DVB-S2 card very soon but if it will only work with Cyberlink I guess that that plan just died (because of lack of deblocking). :(

[ACrowley]

Hmm, does this mean I can't use CoreAVC for HDTV? Or only that I need a slightly faster CPU? I was planning on getting a DVB-S2 card very soon but if it will only work with Cyberlink I guess that that plan just died (because of lack of deblocking). :(

lack of deblocking ?

[blubberbirne]

bbc hd streams doen't work!

[Jay Bee]

lack of deblocking ?

With DXVA deblocking is only performed with 8500/8600 and 2400/2600 GPU's. Not too bad for HD Optical but very bad for HDTV.

[Disabled]

And there I have seen it floating around again. So much for the great activation.
(No I do not have links or do encourage piracy and such)

[CruNcher]

And there I have seen it floating around again. So much for the great activation.
(No I do not have links or do encourage piracy and such)


That's no big problem anymore in the begining it was but now they should be able to cross finance the consumer loses much better, so i wonder why the Consumer version doesn't yet is free (seems to be clever marketing this way it will allways be talked about the Decoder in a time of Hardware Playback accelleration and soon Consumer Hardware Encoding via GPU) :)

[ACrowley]

And there I have seen it floating around again. So much for the great activation.
(No I do not have links or do encourage piracy and such)

Is there some new activation since 1.3.0.0 ?
Dont know...but all Version was avaibele as pirated Versions somewhere in Net..alltimes, so its nothing new

No concern of mine, i use my legal Retail license

[bob0r]

bbc hd streams doen't work!

Sample?
Because all my 100+ BBC-HD samples DO work.

[Disabled]

Is there some new activation since 1.3.0.0 ?
Dont know...but all Version was avaibele as pirated Versions somewhere in Net..alltimes, so its nothing new

No concern of mine, i use my legal Retail license

Its nothing new, I just wanted to point out again, that it takes no time to remove the activation...

[CruNcher]

Could somebody check if they have a better Quality Chroma upsampleing now (compared to Mainconcept/Elecard and FFdshow High Quality Mode) (quality problem i told the devs some months ago, can't read anything about it in the Changelog so that suprises me somehow)
Betaboy ???? (or does CoreAVC expect everyone to use Haalis Renderer ?) would make sense for CorePlayer ;)

[blubberbirne]

Sample?
Because all my 100+ BBC-HD samples DO work.

*hm* after reboot it works :eek:

[BetaBoy]

And there I have seen it floating around again. So much for the great activation.
(No I do not have links or do encourage piracy and such)

Till the variable check comes in and then timebombs it ;-)

[BetaBoy]

Anyway... on tap for this Tuesday:

- Purchasing goes live
- A new installer that is Vista compliant
- New serial number for each user
- 14 day Trial version

[BetaBoy]

Also I did not mention this... but one big addition to CoreAVC Professional 1.5, is that it now supports 4 CPU cores. So if you have a quad core system... let us know how it works ;-)

[Guest]

That will be wonderful.

This is one case where I would love to be able to eat my words!

[deets]

yey i have 4 cores :D

ill get the demo.... any 64 bit compiles for use with wmp11 64 or any future 64 bit media players?

not as vital now MS has patched the spdif output to make it work in 32 bit players

[BetaBoy]

There is also the possibility that we will add 'unlimited' core support in the Enterprise Edition. 64 bit? Well I don't want to comment on that atm.

[Dark Shikari]

Also I did not mention this... but one big addition to CoreAVC Professional 1.5, is that it now supports 4 CPU cores. So if you have a quad core system... let us know how it works ;-)
Oh nice, so maybe I can play my losslessly encoded 223 megabit 1080p file at full speed now :p

[BetaBoy]

FYI... its undocumented atm for a reason... So if its broke... you've been warned... but we would like some feedback if anyone has tested... if you can pls be specific on the CPU's and config ur using. Thx.

[ACrowley]

Sample?
Because all my 100+ BBC-HD samples DO work.

yeah, my too BBC HD Mbaff too

PremierHD/Skyhd too

[Jay Bee]

bob0r: did you see my question about watching live HDTV?

You said the performance was poor compared to playing TS files. What CPU do I need for it to be smooth? The answer to this question is important to me as it will decide whether I will buy a DVB-S2 card or not.

[bob0r]

@Jay Bee

Its hard to say, in dvbviewer GE the video is flawless, in the normal dvbviewer the video plays less than 25fps....

I use a D 930 @ 3.0Ghz (2 core)
So i guess any Core 2 Duo+ would do? no idea.

[arfster]

@Jay Bee

Its hard to say, in dvbviewer GE the video is flawless, in the normal dvbviewer the video plays less than 25fps....


Are you using EVR in dvbviewer GE?

[Jay Bee]

Ah ok, thx. If there's another software that works flawlessly then everything's fine I guess.

[Adbear]

Still waiting for a refund since May from these guys and they've now banned me from their forum for posting complaints about the service

Finally got a refund, only took me complaining in the forum and getting banned to do it

[BetaBoy]

Coming here to OT the thread will not get you anywhere and what you were doing on our forums was not following the rules and were warned and then banned... that was your choice, just like it was mine to issue you a refund after months of use. Lets see if you make the right choices on D9.

[ACrowley]

bob0r: did you see my question about watching live HDTV?

You said the performance was poor compared to playing TS files. What CPU do I need for it to be smooth? The answer to this question is important to me as it will decide whether I will buy a DVB-S2 card or not.

fast Dualocre is required for 1080 h264...for live or TS playback

[Jay Bee]

fast Dualocre is required for 1080 h264...for live or TS playback

Thx. I already played around with these test files (http://x264.nl/h.264.samples/) but I was wondering about the performance loss of live DVB vs TS.

[Dark Shikari]

fast Dualocre is required for 1080 h264...for live or TS playback
I can play 1080p (relatively low bitrate, at least) with a 1Ghz Core 2 Duo (2Ghz on battery mode).

[Jay Bee]

I can play 1080p (relatively low bitrate, at least) with a 1Ghz Core 2 Duo (2Ghz on battery mode).

Yes but low bitrate 1080p is easy compared to high bitrate 1080i, especially if it's MBAFF.

[Adbear]

Coming here to OT the thread will not get you anywhere and what you were doing on our forums was not following the rules and were warned and then banned... you choice just like it was mine to issue you a refund after months of use. Lets see if you make the right choices on D9.

I couldn't follow your rules as your support forum doesn't allow people to post in it (and therefore makes it totally useless) and as no one was bothering to take any notice of my emails it was the only way to get any attention. Also I never got months of use out of it I got around 6 weeks due to the awful activation you use which means if you have to reinstall you have to get in touch with 'support' who just told me to wait til the new version was released (which took 3-4 weeks the first time) and the second time I was offered a refund as it seemed no one wanted to reset the activation so I could continue using it. It then took 3 months before you finally transfered the money to my account. If the support had been there from the begining I wouldn't have had any complaints, but it wasn't.

[Revgen]

A full bob-deinterlaced 60FPS 1080p clip at 5000kbps worked fine. It was definitely full-motion footage that the decoder seemed to handle fine. FPS was at 59fps the whole time. All advanced X264 features were used. This includes b-frames, deblocking, cabac, etc.

I use a dual-core Athlon 4600+, so I can't really see why I would need Quad-Core. However, I'm going to try encoding to 10,000kbps with all the advanced options and see how that goes.

[BetaBoy]

I use a dual-core Athlon 4600+, so I can't really see why I would need Quad-Core. However, I'm going to try encoding to 10,000kbps with all the advanced options and see how that goes.

Pls... I'd like to see some of those results ;-)

[BetaBoy]

Adbear... While I am not gonna make excuses or state specifics in your case or point fingers, I can say (because you gave me the opportunity too) that we have 3 fulltime people on the CoreCodec Support Center who are now doing a hell of a great job via emails, tickets and phone calls daily. Granted alot went on in the early days and we have had holes that needed to be taken care of... and they were. But now with CoreAVC 1.x, CoreAVC QT, CoreAAC, CorePlayer Mobile, BetaPlayer, CoreSVC coming out, we are striving to do an even better job and the staff here is proud of the fact that they have less then a 10 hour turn around average for support tickets. While we recognize there are ppl like yourself and always will be, we will deal with them as best as possible.

Now pls move on, and lets stick to the topic.

[Kurtnoise]

A question for you BetaBoy : maybe this has been already answered but it could be great to add it in your 1st post. So, I've 2 windows OS installed (XP and Vista) on my PC. However, I can't use/install CoreAVC on both systems. So, is there a way to have the possibility to activate the filter on both systems without ordering a new product ?

[ACrowley]

Yes but low bitrate 1080p is easy compared to high bitrate 1080i, especially if it's MBAFF.


my A64 X2 4800 plays "all" H264" Content...even with extreme high Bitrates and or MBAFF...

Also with Cyberlinks Decoder without DXVA

No need for a Quadcore to decode h264 ,when youve a "fast" Dualcore (2ghz+)

[ChronoCross]

A question for you BetaBoy : maybe this has been already answered but it could be great to add it in your 1st post. So, I've 2 windows OS installed (XP and Vista) on my PC. However, I can't use/install CoreAVC on both systems. So, is there a way to have the possibility to activate the filter on both systems without ordering a new product ?

If I remember earlier conversation on the subject it's for single OS only.

[Kurtnoise]

For Windows OS you mean...because what about mplayer's patch (http://code.google.com/p/coreavc-for-linux/) to work on Linux ? :p

Currently, I'm able to use CoreAVC on my XP *and* on my Debian.