VC-1 formally approved by SMPTE! [Archive] - Page 4

bond

27th April 2006, 17:32

smpte defines how to place vc-1 video streams in .mpg and .ts. therefore someone could say that .mpg and .ts are the official vc-1 containers (and not .wmv/.asf)

Then my dream is reality.
http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/resultsz.pnglearn to care about the details

wma9 pro is NOT the same as wma9 (which you were talking about). the two are totally different and incompliant audio codecs

wma9 has NO chance against mp3 at 128kbps as listening tests on hydrogenaudio have shown...

edit: someone could make listening tests with wma9 lossless and claim that therefore wma9 provides better quality than mp3 (obviously as its lossless). obviously this would not make sense either

GodofaGap

27th April 2006, 19:13

Since neither of us are lawyers, it'll probably serve us no good to speculate here about the possible interpretations of that.
The problem is, I think, that this section of the EULA doesn't leave much room for interpretation.

My point is: yes, there might be some restrictions, but they are a part of a much bigger "proprietary vs. open source" legal debate. There are ways to work around the legal obstacles in one way or another. If some dev really wanted ASF support in their app, they could certainly find a way do it.
But this is the other way around. Developers should be *encouraged*, not hindered in their efforts. That is, if MS really wants ASF to be supported in other apps. And I really can't think of any reason why MS wouldn't want this. What is the big the deal with someone writing an open-source (GPL or not) ASF parser/writer? What and whom could it possibly hurt?

Sure, I'll give you that. Developing for ASF might have some restrictions that developing for AVI doesn't, but I don't think legal ramifications are what most devs think about when they start working on new projects. This devotion to AVI and VfW seems little to do with legal issues. Can you make a case that VfW codecs keep being developed because DirectShow/DMO codecs have legal restrictions too?
Oh no, that can solely be blamed on DirectShow being very sensitive to badly written third party filters. :)

How to cause a stack overflow in Notepad using DirectShow filters (http://www.virtualdub.org/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=96#body)

P.S. We can take this to another thread/forum or offline, since it's pretty much outside the scope of this thread.
A topic split would be fine with me. PM's are not really 'my thing'.

cdrinfo

27th April 2006, 22:18

how someone can get the Windows Media Encoder Studio Edition Beta (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/forpros/encoderse/default.aspx)? there is no download link :(

siddharthagandhi

28th April 2006, 00:01

if you read the thread you would have seen that its not released yet but it is coming soon

cdrinfo

28th April 2006, 13:24

Ok, i thought so too, thanks for the confirmation. Is there any way to encode to VC-1, apart from using windows XP x64 and WMEncoder 9 for x64?

siddharthagandhi

29th April 2006, 00:06

just one slightly off topic (but it relates to the HA tests) what is the general ranking of ogg vorbis, lame mp3, and AAC (Nero) from 1 to 3? and generally what most tests have shown, im not asking what is the best or anything

IgorC

29th April 2006, 01:39

learn to care about the details

wma9 pro is NOT the same as wma9 (which you were talking about). the two are totally different and incompliant audio codecs

I didn't say that wma standart was better than LAME mp3.
Can you point at least one post where I say that ? No? Yes? Right?

And to whom you're saying to care about details? To me? lol nice try. I visit HA forum regulary and know what happens.

Learn to care/read well posts.

siddharthagandhi

29th April 2006, 02:22

"Learn to care/read well posts."

He wouldn't be a mod if he didn't know how to do that.

stax76

29th April 2006, 02:31

The only insult/flame here is 'but IgorC are you retarded?'

siddharthagandhi

29th April 2006, 03:07

I edited it. Happy?

gURuBoOleZ

29th April 2006, 11:07

I didn't say that wma standart was better than LAME mp3.
Can you point at least one post where I say that ? No? Yes? Right?

And to whom you're saying to care about details? To me? lol nice try. I visit HA forum regulary and know what happens.

Learn to care/read well posts.

This is what you said:
There are some rumors from Vista and other MS applications beta testers:
New audiocodec WMA 10 is just tweaked WMA9. Not big changes. It's better than MP3 Lame at 128 kbit/s but it's still worse than itunes AAC. Info source hydrogenaudio

source: #90 (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=815388#post815388) of this thread.
Could you give me the exact location of these informations in HA.org? I'm reading HA too and I had made plenty testing these last years: I rarely forget listening tests results. What I read about WMA10 encoder from people having tested it [edit: not at 128 kbps though] is rather the contrary of what you said.

Moreover, if I read this debate correctly, you opposed to bond who told you that WMA9 is inferior to LAME 128 a plot including WMAPro and not WMA. It's as relevant as posting a porn image as proof: it has strictly no sense. Furthemore, this graph only shows that WMAPro is tied with all other competitors (including iTunes AAC and Vorbis aoTuV) and it can't be quoted as argument or proof for any encoder's superiority. The graph you're looking for is that one:

http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/plot18z.png

and it concludes that test (http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/presentation.html).

@bond> the (valid) difference between LAME and WMA9 was really small. So I wouldn't say that WMA "has no chance" ;)

IgorC

29th April 2006, 15:36

This is what you said:
There are some rumors from Vista and other MS applications beta testers:
New audiocodec WMA 10 is just tweaked WMA9. Not big changes. It's better than MP3 Lame at 128 kbit/s but it's still worse than itunes AAC. Info source hydrogenaudio

source: #90 (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=815388#post815388) of this thread.
Could you give me the exact location of these informations in HA.org? I'm reading HA too and I had made plenty testing these last years: I rarely forget listening tests results. What I read about WMA10 encoder from people having tested it [edit: not at 128 kbps though]...

As I said there are rumors not a listening test and as the result of that there is no official information neither software. However Serge from HA gived some information
Post 16 http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=43656&st=0

Moreover, if I read this debate correctly, you opposed to bond ....
If you read well firstly he agressivly opposed to me without knowing if I was talkning about pro or std and started to teach me to care about the details.

....who told you that WMA9 is inferior to LAME 128 a plot including WMAPro and not WMA. It's as relevant as posting a porn image as proof: it has strictly no sense. Furthemore, this graph only shows that WMAPro is tied with all other competitors (including iTunes AAC and Vorbis aoTuV) and it can't be quoted as argument or proof for any encoder's superiority.
It should be adressed not only to me as well to Bond too. His statements has the same point.
In fact when I said "WMA (pro?) is better than Lame mp3 at 128 " I knew perfectly the interpretation of the test results. i.e in the last 48 test 3gpp was stadistcly tied
to Winamp and Nero AAC+ encoders. But what happened really on HA? Now Nero's one is considirated as best AAC+ encoder to be tested in 48 multi test. Because this test is unique information. Yes, stadistiscly it's tied , but in fact considerated as best.

gURuBoOleZ

29th April 2006, 15:55

As I said there are rumors not a listening test and as the result of that there is no official information neither software. However Serge from HA gived some information
Post 16 http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=43656&st=0

I know this link. But you talked about beta testers: as far as I know, Serge only count for one person. Moreover, Serge only mentionned pre-tests without giving any precision (blind or not, one or more sample, etc...) and he didn't said that WMA10 is inferior to iTunes AAC. As you mentioned several information that aren't claimed by Serge, I've asked for your sources. I'm still waiting for them ;)

If you read well firstly he agressivly opposed to me without knowing if I was talkning about pro or std and started to teach me to care about the details.
He reacts to your wrong arguments. And it's not the first IIRC that your interpreting listening tests results in a wrong manner. I could understand by his reaction - I sometimes feel the same things with people used to distort facts.

But what happened really on HA? Now Nero's one is considirated as best AAC+ encoder to be tested in 48 multi test. Because this test is unique information. [B]Yes, stadistiscly it's tied , but in fact considerated as best.

I beg your pardon, but Nero AAC isn't considered as best (not alone at least) as you said - and the first member who will be tempted to claim that with this test as basis would break TOS#8 obligation. Back up your claims, please.

Sagittaire

29th April 2006, 16:03

well this test is outdated (2004-05-23)

http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/plot18z.png

Now it's more like that ...

http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/resultsz.png

Perhaps wrong but there are no public test at this time for wma sdt 9.1 and no public test for wma sdt 10.0. If mp3can progress certainely that wma sdt can progress too.

IgorC

29th April 2006, 16:05

I'm not going to back my claims not even in wet dreams.
and I'm not violating the TOS#8. You don't understand what I'm saying. All answers are already in my previos posts.

We can keep discussing and discussing you know it perfectly.
So I will stop here. I have a lot of things to do today. And I'm not going to waste time on discussing not because I have no arguments but because it's useless since we don't understand to each other.

If you wanna accuse in tos#8 somebody then you should to do that with many people from HA forum.

Good bye.

diogen

29th April 2006, 16:09

...Yes, stadistiscly it's tied , but in fact considerated as best.WTF?
Do you understand what you're talking about? How can one be considered best if it is statistically tied?
Those arguments might fly at hydrogenaudion, but here you should keep them to yourself.

Diogen.

siddharthagandhi

29th April 2006, 16:43

You better hold back on the flaming the mods might do something to you.

diogen

29th April 2006, 16:44

I'm not going to back my claims...Of course, why would you?
You don't understand what I'm saying.Would be nice if you did yourself.
And I'm not going to waste time on discussing Sounds really promissing. If you check in the meantime the difference between statistics and wishful thinking - everyone would benefit.

Diogen.

gURuBoOleZ

29th April 2006, 16:46

Sagittaire> that's entirely true.

IgorC >
And from where comes your knowledge about what people on HA.org are thinking? The only rational source I can find would be threads and posts published on the board - but I can't find such claims. Do you have some unknown powers giving you the possibility to read in people's mind?
For your own enlightment: you weren't even registered on HA.org when moderators and other members started to fight against wrong analysis of listening tests results. I don't noticed any changes in the last weeks, and as far as I can read, people are not considering Nero as better than other HE-AAC competitors like Coding Tech's one.

But your free to save face by quoting messages from "many people" that are violating TOS#8 and statistical conclusions. Otherwise, your claims are pure calumny (against a forum, against moderators of this forum).

IgorC

29th April 2006, 17:45

Guruboolez. Were you never disagree with admins of HA? Garf?
You did it so many times!!!!
I'm not flaming to anyone and trying to answer the question in the excatly same form as question.

Guru, as you know Nero AAC is considirated as optimal (if youy don't like the word "best") encoder to participate in multi 48 test. If you don't agree with then you don't agree with hundred people from HA who considirating to include Nero AAC to multitest.

Did you get my point now? what I´m trying to say that it´s best conditionally not best as itself.

Do you understand now?

I would repeat we are (me and you, Guru) people who will fight own point infinitly. Don't you?

IgorC

29th April 2006, 17:52

Guruboolez, if you standing by your words then go on HA forum and ask to not include Nero AAC+ encoder into 48 multitest because of " all aac+ encoder are tied". I want to see how many people (including admins) will respond your question.

Do it!!! if you are so rightfull person.

Why you're compalining here about interpretation of test results?
Why you are not asking it to Garf ( admin and Nero dev )?

avih

29th April 2006, 20:21

guys, pls take it easy and keep the discussion intelligent ;)

gURuBoOleZ

29th April 2006, 20:48

Guruboolez. Were you never disagree with admins of HA? Garf?
You did it so many times!!!!
What is the point of this?

Guru, as you know Nero AAC is considirated as optimal (if youy don't like the word "best") encoder to participate in multi 48 test. If you don't agree with then you don't agree with hundred people from HA who considirating to include Nero AAC to multitest.
I'm making effort to stay polite...
One encoder must be selected to compete in a multi-format listening test. The common sense tells to everybody to use the one that obtained the best mark, and not to choose arbitrarily one of those that are tied at first place. What did you expect: that the five different HE-AAC implementation must all be selected because they're all tied?

Did you get my point now? what I´m trying to say that it´s best conditionally not best as itself.
Does someone has a decoder to translate this?
There's nothing such as "best conditionally". There's a probability for Nero AAC to be the best, but there's also a probability (lower, but significant) for 3GPP to be the best too. That's why there are confidence bar, and why people who understand plots are saying that all these encoders are tied.

Do you understand now?
This argument doesn't explain anything about "many people are thinking that..." and other claims. It seems that you have your own interpretation of listening tests, and that you're trying to convince yourself that many people are thinking the same way.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

communist

29th April 2006, 21:06

Can you take that HA stuff/listening test somewhere else?

This thread is about VC-1 - a video codec ;)

GmorG McRoth

29th April 2006, 21:06

All this talk about AAC is nice but, are there any news about VC-1 status?

-edit-

nice timing communist XD

siddharthagandhi

29th April 2006, 21:40

Yea. Personal battles like yours should be done through PM.

zambelli

29th April 2006, 23:36

are there any news about VC-1 status?
Yes, it's alive and well, living with uncle SMPTE. :)

I'm sure you're asking about WMV9 AP (WVC1) codec that I said would be out "later this month"... and yet, here we are, end of month, and it's still not out. What happened? Well, what can I say... shipping products in large companies is difficult, even when it's just a DLL that's being released.

We're tying up some loose ends and still trying to release the codec as soon as possible. Unless something goes horribly wrong, the updated WVC1 codec should be out within a few weeks - in one shipping vehicle or another.

I'm sorry I have to be so ambiguous about it.

GmorG McRoth

29th April 2006, 23:54

Small companies are not keeping release terms too. It's way too comon lately for my taste, though I understand if it's not ready you can't just release it on us, kinda like giving half cooked dish for the dinner... I hope it won't take too long, I'm hungry.

siddharthagandhi

30th April 2006, 00:33

"within a few weeks - in one shipping vehicle or another."

a few weeks!?!??

oh man this sucks.....

i thought studio edition was coming out this past friday, thats what diogen said...

diogen

30th April 2006, 03:08

...i thought studio edition was coming out this past friday, thats what diogen said...Hey... It's not me, Ben said that in two posts on AVS. I'm just the messenger.
BTW, "couple weeks" (zambelli) and "today" (Ben, on Fridey) _is_ a hell of a difference...
I guess, that's how big companies operate - no one knows for sure (forget about being able to tell).

This does suck...

Diogen.

siddharthagandhi

30th April 2006, 03:51

Ben works for Microsoft?

diogen

30th April 2006, 04:42

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/forpros/encoderse/usingsehd.aspx

Diogen.

trbarry

1st May 2006, 14:03

Well, drat! I see everyone's losing interest in this thread now the codec has been delayed. :(

- Tom

GmorG McRoth

1st May 2006, 14:14

I didn't loose interest, im just watching and waiting quietly.
most of things that ware to say, were already said so we are waiting for codec to talk about it's pros, and cons when we have chance to actually use it.

diogen

1st May 2006, 19:29

Well, drat! I see everyone's losing interest in this thread now the codec has been delayed...I'd love to bitch about it, but it won't help anyway :)

Diogen.

siddharthagandhi

1st May 2006, 21:17

I didn't lose interest...its just that theres nothing to show for all this time

zambelli

1st May 2006, 23:39

I can assure you guys that nobody finds it more frustrating than me that the codec is still not on the web. :(

diogen

2nd May 2006, 00:34

I can assure you guys that nobody finds it more frustrating than me that the codec is still not on the web. :(
If there would be even a theoretical chance for this to be resolved, I'd bet you are wrong.:sly:
But I've lost bets before...;)

Since we have more time now to read, the Abstract in Ben's article starts with:
"A beta version of Windows Media Encoder Studio Edition is available."
I guess nobody's told him yet that it is not.:(

Diogen.

zambelli

2nd May 2006, 01:15

If there would be even a theoretical chance for this to be resolved, I'd bet you are wrong.:sly:
But I've lost bets before...;)
I assure it's just a question of "when" and not "if".

Since we have more time now to read, the Abstract in Ben's article starts with:
"A beta version of Windows Media Encoder Studio Edition is available."
I guess nobody's told him yet that it is not.:(
The problem is that articles and downloads have different release criteria, different deadlines, and are published in different sections of the website... so yeah, it's not a good situation to be in - the articles are published but the downloads are not.

siddharthagandhi

2nd May 2006, 01:34

For most other releases in general (by any company) its usually the exact opposite circumstance.

diogen

2nd May 2006, 04:51

I still believe it won't be "just a DLL" that will be released.
Based on that note in ExtremeTech, I think we'll see the codec, WME Studio (beta) and WMP11 (probably beta) released at the same time (I understand that WMP10 as of now plays VC-1).
WMP11 might even have AACS approval to play back HD-DVD content. There are still no HDMI video cards and PC drives, but those must be out shortly (the NEC drive in the Toshiba HD-DVD player _is_ a simple IDE PC drive that will get a XP driver).
Vista is 8+ months away, I think MS can't afford not to give XP users an option (and a cheap one at that) to play HD-DVD content - they will risk to lose momentum. And announced Toshiba (laptop) and Sony (desktop) products prove it can be done on XP.

Or may be it's just wishful thinking ....
If releasing "just a DLL" takes this much time, there is something really wrong at MS...

Diogen.

GmorG McRoth

2nd May 2006, 09:28

If releasing "just a DLL" takes this much time, there is something really wrong at MS...
More like there is something wrong with DLL.

zambelli

2nd May 2006, 22:19

I still believe it won't be "just a DLL" that will be released. Based on that note in ExtremeTech, I think we'll see the codec, WME Studio (beta) and WMP11 (probably beta) released at the same time (I understand that WMP10 as of now plays VC-1).
I will neither confirm nor deny that. :)
But I will say that the 3 releases that you mentioned have separate, mutually independent schedules. None of them are holding each other back, if that's what you're thinking.
Vista is 8+ months away, I think MS can't afford not to give XP users an option (and a cheap one at that) to play HD-DVD content - they will risk to lose momentum. And announced Toshiba (laptop) and Sony (desktop) products prove it can be done on XP.
I actually don't know what the plan is there, since that kind of scenario (HD-DVD on XP) requires a lot of different pieces to fall into place. It's not just a simple matter of releasing, say, a decoder or something... There's so much "protected playback" stuff associated with HD-DVD and BluRay that it's not an easy task protecting the entire playback pipeline - and that's something that Microsoft would have to implement in order to get approval from the HD-DVD/BluRay people.

diogen

2nd May 2006, 23:44

.. the 3 releases that you mentioned have separate, mutually independent schedules.I can understand how the codec (DLL) can be "dropped" into the old WME9 (and I hope it will, to simplify the learning curve).
But I can't imagine WME Studio released without the new codec. Hence, they are not _completely_ independent.
... There's so much "protected playback" stuff associated with HD-DVD and BluRay that it's not an easy task protecting the entire playback pipeline - and that's something that Microsoft would have to implement in order to get approval from the HD-DVD/BluRay people.As Amir mentioned on AVS, the player has to be AACS-certified (no "approval from the HD-DVD/BluRay people"). And if it gets hacked, it costs 8mil (not that simple, but close). Who is better positioned to take this "gamble" with HD-DVD playback than Microsoft? If they don't do it - nobody will (for WinXP on existing PCs).
And this is what I don't think will happen (i.e. MS can't afford let to happen).

Diogen.