was there any outcome on the 4.11 debate

[john blox]

I used fairuse a lot, then a tried 2 pass 4.11 using flask (nice n easy) and I thought the results from the 2 pass were very good, whether they were better or fairuse was better I dunno. Anyway I wondered if Mr Fairuse himself had done any tests or if there were any conclusions by higher beibgs on the net as to the quality of the 2 codecs. Certainly the movies I DID encode using 2 pass 4.11 suffered from NO artifacts and I think maybe less pixelation in fast action scenes though I didn't encode the same movie twice to compare properlly.

Trying to fit castaway into a 700mb divx with 96k sound would probably be a good test as I remember that my fairuse version pixelated a lot when he exited the airplane and was fighting with the sea just before landing on the beach..

NE1 ???

[fox-didl]

Hi,

i'm also a user of FairUse and waiting too of any outcome with updated divx-codec. The quality of .avi with divX 4.x is much better.

This would be a very great christmas-present.... *smile*


:) greetings from austria
fox-didl

[dvdyke]

The programmer is too lazy and won't go open source. Shame really as it was a good start for an all in one ripper and encoder. Could have gone a long way.

[Sven Bent]

WHAT who the helle are you to complain.
the mans make a grat prgoram ans you are not satificies its free ???

you wnat open source..you canot demand opensource. its the programmer knowledges why shoulde he give it away so other can get credits for his work ????. let the man keeps his code if that whats he's want its free anyway.

yuo jut be happy that he never charged for the program... it clerly that you are not a programmer yourself.....

[pacohaas]

FU2K has said that when he's done developing it, it will probably go GPL, but he's not done developing it yet.

[fu2k]

Please, if you don't like the pie I am serving, feel free to eat elsewhere.

[dvdyke]

I apologise for any offence caused. I should have chosen my words more carefully. In another thread I chose the word 'bored' rather than 'lazy'. The developer of Nandub has stopped developing the application any further. It could be due to other commitments. It could be simply that he feels there is no need to develop it further. Or he could simply have got bored of it and chose not to do anymore work on what as you say is effectively freeware for which he may feel he is not getting anything from.
I do feel however that Fairuse had and still has the potential to offer a lot. Whether the programmer wishes to continue with developing it or not is his choice of course. Nobody is paying for it so whatever his choice is there should be no reason for anyone to complain. I was not complaining. I was merely pointing out that the programmer of Fairuse may have got bored with developing it due to it's apparent current slow progress. As I said the term 'lazy' was a feux pas on my part.

Personally I would love to see DiVX4 support and integrated sound compression/muxing. It was due to the developtment of Nandub and other methods for getting faster encodes with what could be interpreted as better quality that I moved away from Fairuse some time ago. If the programmer of Fairuse ever develops these aspects into Fairuse I will certainly be looking at it again as a viable means to rip and encode due to it's sheer ease of use. It 110% has the edge interface wise. EasyDiVX, XMPEG and a few other 'all in one' applications don't hand a candle to it in the GUI terms and easy set of options for setting up an encoding session.

Anyhow as I said before I aplogise for my coming in with such a blatant and rude reply. I do so hope Fairuse does develop the program to it's natural conclusion. However if he does not then I won't be bitter. It's his program and he can do whatever he likes with it :)

Thanks for reading.