Which is your Choice of Container in 2006

[siddharthagandhi]

Still, I have yet to encounter it in the noob world....

[NeD tHe OnE]

Matroska Won!

[chongy5]

Wooooohoooooo! Matroska all the way.

[robU*4]

Sure, people moved away from OGM to Matroska, but that's kind of my point: what's to stop people from moving from MKV to Next Big OSS Container?

Even the main NUT developer admits that sometimes he wonder if NUT is necessary when Matroska exist... It was started before Matroska became popular.


Right, I totally agree. I'm not trying to bash on Matroska or its quality. I'm just saying that I don't have much faith in its long term support.

It started 4 years ago (approximately) and we're still working on it. And it's finally getting support without our own investment. (before we had to do all the code if we wanted to have it supported somewhere)


The day I see Matroska support on a Sony player, I'll tip my hat to the Matroska guys and say, "Congrats, you've guys have gone mainstream." :)

So far we preferred to support it in Windows products :D

[multicone]

The day I see Matroska support on a Sony player, I'll tip my hat to the Matroska guys and say, "Congrats, you've guys have gone mainstream." :)

That won't ever happen. SONY will rather prefer to launch their own container, and PANASONIC will soon after that release a competing one :D .....

[NeD tHe OnE]

Can any one help me to find this "MeGUI-x264_generic_profiles_v24.zip" thats by Sharktooth.. the site's down I cant get it .. Plz can any one email to this "nedtheone@msn.com" .. I need it bad PLZ! with the guide to choose the specific profile for a single cd's or 2,3 ...

[Sirber]

1) You are double posting
2) you are out of topic at both place
3) I'm contacting a moderator :p

[Sirber]

Ha, you forgot DIVX container :)

[mod]

Ha, you forgot DIVX container :)
THAT is "others" :D

[Sirber]

as other as OGG and NUT? ;)

[avih]

@NeD tHe OnE:
Please respect the forum rules. Next time it'll be a strike. Please don't follow this post.

thanks,
avih

[XmSurfer]

I consider OGM to be a subset of Ogg. Am I wrong?

No, but if you say Ogg, I believe most people will think OggFile and not the OGM hack. I believe OGM is called OGM to distinguish it from OggFile. That alone should tell you something.

Sure, people moved away from OGM to Matroska, but that's kind of my point: what's to stop people from moving from MKV to Next Big OSS Container?

Nothing. But I think the difference between OGM and MKV is bigger than the difference between Matroska and the "Next Big OSS Container" will be. So there might not be as much impetus to move from Matroska as there was to move from OGM.


Right, I totally agree. I'm not trying to bash on Matroska or its quality. I'm just saying that I don't have much faith in its long term support.

I never implied that you were bashing Matroska or its quality. I was just stating some of my reasoning for believing Matroska will be supported 10 years from now. One being that any future container will probably not have any overwhelming advantages compared to Matroska. However, since I don't have a crystal ball, I don't know what will come along or the features it will have, so I could be wrong again.


That's exactly right. Sometimes it does happen that way - just look at MP3 and AVI support. My point is that when that does happen - it adds years to the expected lifetime of the format. It's hard to extinguish support for a format when there are hardware devices out there counting on the support.

I have the same belief in OSS extending the life of a format that you have in hardware devices doing the same. If Matroska was a closed spec, closed source format, I don't believe we would be having this discussion. That fact that Matroska is so open is a great benefit. You can use Matroska in a spec compliant way, or you can use Matroska as a starting point for you own format. I believe this will mean that Matroska, in one form or another, will be around 10 years from now. Who knows, it might be used as the starting point by MPEG for a MP5 container.


I think you need to have some big "players" involved in order to consider something mainstream. If you ask me, Linux went mainstream when companies like IBM and Sun got behind it - not when 15-yr old kids were installing it on their parents' computers.
The day I see Matroska support on a Sony player, I'll tip my hat to the Matroska guys and say, "Congrats, you've guys have gone mainstream." :)

I was making the point that mainstream availability is overrated and I used the Linux OS as an example. Linux was not on the verge of disappearing before mainstream companies got involved. It was doing well, which is why the mainstream companies got involved in the first place. Those "15-yr old kids" and others kept when it was not mainstream(ish) and still keeps Linux going either by programming, reporting bugs, or just using the OS. Mainstream companies have helped Linux alot but I don't think that are essential for Linux to survive just like I don't think mainstream support is essential for Matroska to survive. Would it be nice? Of course. Is it necessary. No. Vivo is still supported today and I doubt you can make the case that it enjoys mainstream availability.

Aren't they connected? Isn't a format with greater platform support and greater userbase expected to live longer?

So you basically meant support when you said market penetration? Matroska has been alive 3 yrs now without much "market penetration" but it does have pretty good support in terms of software and the OSes you can play it on. It also has a nice userbase, not large but substantial. If it does get any market penetration it will be because of its success prior to mainstream companies jumping on the bandwagon.

I hope I haven't been rambling.

[siddharthagandhi]

"Ha, you forgot DIVX container"

I thought DIVX was same as .avi

[ssjkakaroto]

i've used matroska since the beggining and it's still my container of choice but IMHO if mp4 really takes off on hw players (being backed up by big companies), i don't think it'll survive in the long run

[Teegedeck]

Another one for Matroska; how could I escape its charm... ;)

It does anything I could ask for, is reliable and easy to handle -- plus, who could rival Mosu's commitment to fulfilling user-requests? I'm positive that I'm never gonna invest into a standalone player again, so 'hardware-support' is a non-issue for me.

[stax76]

:goodpost:

[multicone]

I also wonder what will be the result of almost the same poll (http://forums.virtualdub.org/index.php?act=ST&f=2&t=12242&st=0#entry49578)on the n000b/support forum (http://forum.virtualdub.org) of Virtualdub ?

[Atamido]

what's to stop people from moving from MKV to Next Big OSS Container? Ideally nothing, which is kind of the point. Matroska is an open and free format so anyone can read the specs, make a parser, and dump all of the A/V information out to another place.

What is scary is people putting stuff in containers that aren't open, where there might be legal or technical issues with trying to extract that information. If I wanted, I could attach the Matroska specifications in plain ASCII text to every Matroska file I use to ensure that even with just the file, someone is going to be able to reverse engineer the format.

[NeD tHe OnE]

So Sad to see no one voted for OGM

[Liisachan]

If I could vote for 2 of them, I might vote for OGM too, because I really like Vorbis.
Besides, the current MP4's chapters by Nero (ANSI, not Unicode) are only as good as OGM's chapters. Technically though, this doesn't mean MP4 is silly--what's silly is Nero.

[Kurtnoise]

Fortunately, Nero is not the only one tool to mux chapters into mp4. So, ANSI or Unicode is not a problem.

[siddharthagandhi]

Nero isn't silly. Wait till I release my codec comparison. The PSNR's show that MP is better than x264, and HP is a lot better than x264.

Anyways, for normal video distribution and encoding its just fine.

[xyloy]

The PSNR's show that MP is better than x264, and HP is a lot better than x264.
PSNR itself doesn't mean much. :P

[Liisachan]

Fortunately, Nero is not the only one tool to mux chapters into mp4. So, ANSI or Unicode is not a problem. Come to think of it, this is a player-side problem too. mp4box/megui can put UTF-8 (with or without BOM) chapters into MP4, but MPC will interpret it as ANSI, probably for compatibility with Nero.

[siddharthagandhi]

PSNR may not mean much, but if you watch the video (im gng 2 attach the vids as well) you would see that there is a quality difference in favor of Nero Digital.

[Match]

Without doubts: MKV (Matroska)

:cool:

[xyloy]

PSNR may not mean much, but if you watch the video (im gng 2 attach the vids as well) you would see that there is a quality difference in favor of Nero Digital.
I don't think so. With the slowest settings and no post-processing for both codecs, Nero is the looser(by far).
Open your eyes...

[CruNcher]

a example where .mp4 fails @ the moment completly

MP4Box.exe" -add raw.h264:fps=23.976 -add audio.mp4:delay=-1000 -out final.mp4

;) no exisitng parser understands the delay=-1000 at the moment with Matroska no problem ;D

btw: also muxing speed and required space (for the muxing) between Matroska and Mp4box is very interesting in that regards Matroska wins again :D

[baklanoid]

Punch me if i wrong, but Mpeg-4 container based on QuickTime(mov)...

[siddharthagandhi]

That's what I heard most often. But a few people argue the opposite.

[Drachir]

Punch me if i wrong, but Mpeg-4 container based on QuickTime(mov)...


http://www.chiariglione.org/MPEG/faq/mp4-sys/sys-faq-mp4.htm#MP4-MPEG_4_is_based_on
2. MPEG-4 is based on QuickTime?
No, QuickTime was taken as a starting point only for the file format. Other relevant software products and their features have influenced the file format as well.

One of the other relevant software products is VRML. In MP4 you have a BIFS Track which isn't there in mov. So you could ask, is MPEG-4 based on VRML?

[baklanoid]

The design is based on the QuickTime® format from Apple Computer Inc.
(http://www.chiariglione.org/MPEG/standards/mpeg-4/mpeg-4.htm#10.9)

and

The QuickTime file format has been used as the basis of the MPEG-4 standard, developed
by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (from QT docs)

.. so i said "based".

[Drachir]

One of the roots of MPEG-4 is the QuickTime file format, but MP4(14496-14) != MOV(QuickTime file format).

Ok, if you take a look at most files which claim to be a MP4 file(ftyp is set to mp41 or mp42) they missing a complete IOD and BIFS/OD Track.

In my opinion this files are not that much different from a MOV file. If I would compare such a file with a MOV file, I would say MP4 is more or less like MOV.
Most players around handle MP4/MOV files the same way. I wouldn't call such a player a MP4 Player. I would say this is a player for ISO base media format compatible files.
With one Audio/Video only file there is no problem. If you tread such a MP4 file like MOV, it will displayed right.

In my opinion most so called MP4 files are more 3gp or a ISO base media format file with a wrong set file brand(ftyp box) than a MP4 file.

However ftyp=isom or ftyp=avc1 souldn't be used for the main brand and as far as I know there is no file name extension defined for 14496-12 and 14496-15.

The user don't care what kind of container he is really using as long as he can watch his movie.

Just My Opinion
Richard

[multicone]

btw: also muxing speed and required space (for the muxing) between Matroska and Mp4box is very interesting in that regards Matroska wins again :D

Wait a minute ! Didn't the Linux (NUT) people tell us matroska is bloated ?!? That can't be true, you must be wrong !

[BetaBoy]

Matroska 'IS' what you make it to be... in that is gives you the 'ultimate' control of any container to add _only_ the components that you need and nothing more.

Not to get to OT... but with the upcoming 'namespace' addition to EBML (what Matroska is based on) it could even be a filesystem or the basis for a database.

[bond]

I repeat: Windows Media Video is not a file format.
The name of the format is "Advanced Systems Format". The entry should say: Advanced Systems Format (ASF, WMV).

Not that it matters much... But we might as well keep it accurate. :)ok removed the "video" :)

[b9AcE]

I don't use standalones (my 22" CRT monitor is enough).
I keep the "latest known working version" of all usefull software, so I will always be able to reinstall even old (no longer distributed) programs.

Since this pretty much removes any dangers of using a "non-mainstream" container, I go for the one with the most capabilities and the most flexibility:
Matroska

The only time I use any other container these days is MP4 for my PSP...

[NeD tHe OnE]

Great work Matroska ... When will the menu feature work on all the players? .. like MPC

[NeD tHe OnE]

In what terms mp4 is better than avi?

[bond]

In what terms mp4 is better than avi?
:search::readfaq:

[Drachir]

In what terms mp4 is better than avi?
What do you want achieve with this question?

You could also ask, in what terms mkv is better than avi?

If you want information about mp4 read the sticker( http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=62723 ).
MP4 files can be very complex. In some people eyes this is a disadvantage. Other people like what is possible with mp4.
Read the sticker and build your own opinion.

[NeD tHe OnE]

What is the possible future of Matroska?

Matroska in SONY player? ;)

or in some local hardware players .. or no support @ all.. Like finally Avi (DivX) got support and then mp4 ...

I'd really love to see Matroska in hardware players.. But I think big companies would rather create their own containers instead of taking Mkv ..

Well! what do you say?

[foxyshadis]

Possible future: Matroska becomes the One True Codec, all companies and software switch to it, mentioning avi or mp4 makes people think you're a crazy throwback. :p (Hey, you said possible, not probable.)

[b9AcE]

Well, I see a lot af advertisements for standalones that support "AVI-files", without saying anything about which codecs they actually mean.
If they consider this to be acceptable behaviour (I don't), then they could just as well implement Matroska the same way.
So sure, it could happen... ...kind of.

[Sharktooth]

Well, I see a lot af advertisements for standalones that support "AVI-files", without saying anything about which codecs they actually mean.
If they consider this to be acceptable behaviour (I don't), then they could just as well implement Matroska the same way.
So sure, it could happen... ...kind of.
Agreed. Companies try to fool customers with the 'AVI' term coz everyone knows AVI... but the average joe could not know what's inside an AVI...

[tehpwner2]

mp4 just because I can't be bothered to switch to mkv.

[Sharktooth]

i forgot to say why i voted for MKV.
I "prefer" MKV for its flexibility and tools even if i usually "use" mp4.
But nothing will stop me to use exclusively MKV if it gets a decent support in SAPs.

[Skelsgard]

Matroska.
do i really need to specify why? :D

[gameplaya15143]

I still use OGM :D
MKV was still a baby (and wasn't really ready for use) when I started using OGM, it does what I needed it to back then, still does now. I will probably switch to using mkv at some point, but I doubt that will be very soon.

[NeD tHe OnE]

Finally 1 Vote For Ogm!! I Was Dying To See 1!!