DivX 7 With H.264 Support, worth the exitement?

[Atak_Snajpera]

But I'm happy to test any samples you guys may have.
1920x1080 29.97fps @ 50000kbps
http://www.mediafire.com/?yd5glzymjdo

It works ok on my 4850 in DXVA mode

[SeeMoreDigital]

1920x1080 29.97fps @ 50000kbps
http://www.mediafire.com/?yd5glzymjdo

It works ok on my 4850 in DXVA modeHi Atak,

Your sample file stutters when left in the .MP4 container. But played fine when re-muxed into the .TS container.

That said.... I reckon it's right on the Sigma's chip-set/board designs limitations.


Cheers

[crypto]

1920x1080 29.97fps @ 50000kbps
http://www.mediafire.com/?yd5glzymjdo

It works ok on my 4850 in DXVA mode
Nice. May I ask what HD cam was used?

[Atak_Snajpera]

Canon HV20
Source was 1440x1080i MPEG-2 @ 24Mbps

[crypto]

Really impressive. Thanks for the info.

[sneaker_ger]

Since Divx will support ASS/SSA subtitles in mkv in the future I'm asking myself wether custom fonts (as mkv attachments) will also be supported or not?

[Doom9]

Don't you have a harder sample? My CPU complained that it has nothing to do playing that video.. the CPU was basically idle and my (passive) 9600GT did all the work. MPC-HC really was worth the upgrade - now playing a 50mbit AVC stream uses as much CPU as playing a lowly 700MB XviD rip.

[Atak_Snajpera]

Don't you have a harder sample? My CPU complained that it has nothing to do playing that video.. the CPU was basically idle and my (passive) 9600GT did all the work. MPC-HC really was worth the upgrade - now playing a 50mbit AVC stream uses as much CPU as playing a lowly 700MB XviD rip.
This sample is for people using hardware players. It was supposed to test if spec are really true.

[CruNcher]

The Popcornhour 100 is $179. At Black Friday, we'll have a Blu-ray player for $128.
My first DivX capable player cost me $300 back in the day.

And somehow I don't see the $50 DVD player play DivX7 in the near future...seeing how things developed on the DivX5 front, I find it much more likely that prices will move along the lines of Blu-ray prices and thus I'm asking if it makes sense to try and establish another hardware category that's just below the
already established standard. Does it really make sense for hardware makers to produce two chip lines instead of one, where they have the chance to put the 4.1 chip in millions of devices even today? And from a user perspective, you're repeating history with potential buyers invariably falling into the not compatible or not quite compatible trap. Anyone remember GMC? And that wasn't a particularly important feature to begin with. I feel eerily reminded of the discussion when the DivX certification was first created - only then, the argument about chip cost had more merit as we didn't have a up and coming disc format paving the way for 2 years.

And last time I checked my ISP's website, I could actually have a 50mbit connection. Granted, it's expensive as hell, but there are quite a few places where a 100mbit connection for a reasonable amount of money. And just because the bandwidth isn't there shouldn't mean the hardware shouldn't be able to decode something.. streaming isn't the only way to deliver content (back when the first DivX capable players came out it took me hours upon hours to download 700MB..).

And subsidized? You're talking about the PS3, right? Because the rest of it, the Blu camp is having us pay through the nose now they've done away with the cheap competition.

Imho the Situation with AVC isn't as comparable anymore as the Situation we had back then when DivX became successful there is basicly no such a widespread DSP support currently from Asia (which was the reason we had cheap solutions available and DivX became successful @ all).
ASP was basically a in the Wild thing AVC is much better kept under wrap (by the circles behind it) and protected to secure Licensing @ all costs (also a reason of course Hollywood accepted it). So even with DivX going that way now i wouldn't expect cheap solutions as we saw back in ASP days anytime soon also with the NAFTA in mind :(

The idea of creating our own Community based Standard seems much much more ideal to me, though it would need alot of work but im sure it's doable and im also sure so far that Hardware Developers would support it widely and even if they don't with all the possibilities of General Purpose Chips (like widespread GPUs) we could do acceleration independent of DSP logic (though it still has to be seen how fast that really is as neither Nvidia/ATI Decoding are GPU based but DSP logic itself inside of the GPU) :).
People should never forget without us DivX Networks/Inc wouldn't be there where it is today.

[Shinigami-Sama]

Don't you have a harder sample? My CPU complained that it has nothing to do playing that video.. the CPU was basically idle and my (passive) 9600GT did all the work. MPC-HC really was worth the upgrade - now playing a 50mbit AVC stream uses as much CPU as playing a lowly 700MB XviD rip.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=142430
have fun man ;)
[/ot]

[Doom9]

well.. I guess I could load it into PowerDVD or TotalMediaThreatre but mostly I use MPC HC - so if that doesn't handle the file I'm not off to a good start.

[DigitAl56K]

I think our discussions frequently lose sight of use cases and interoperability. We're currently discussing H.264 at rates up to 50Mbps (which is completely over the top for almost any content) and questioning why we don't use m2ts, for example.

Do we all agree that:

20Mbps is more than enough for virtually any 1080 video to look nice and sharp
More devices should be able to do level 4.0 than level 4.1, now (STBs) and in the future (portable players)
Decoding 50Mbps will burn batteries much faster than 20Mbps in portable devices and increase heat
The maximum average rate to fit 90 minutes of video on a dual layer DVD is about 12.5Mbps including audio
50Mbps will not stream reliably over wireless G. Keep in mind that N is draft and many devices have quite a lag in supporting new wireless standards. Most N routers (under $100) also share the 2.4Ghz band with G devices, reducing throughput. Most 5Ghz routers run into the $100-200 price range and dual band routers are $200+
It may be a long time before the majority of people have internet connections approaching anywhere near 50Mbps. My home connection is 5-7Mbps and it hasn't improved any in the past 3 years. ISPs are also trying to throttle rather than increase capacity.
We'd all like to see a lot of hardware supporting MKV with guaranteed support for metadata, chapters, multilingual audio, etc.
Consistent subtitle support is important. Nobody likes keeping their subs in 3 different formats in case the other two don't work properly
AAC is nice surround solution with much friendlier licensing than most other formats (Vorbis aside), and will work with many more receivers than Vorbis will for the near-medium term future


Developing a format specification involves thinking about not just about what top-end/DVD devices will do today but what devices can be brought into the ecosystem tomorrow. Considering all of the technologies that we want to work with, if we draw a "interoperability" line in the sand in terms of requirements and we think about all of the devices now and future, what falls on either side of that line as the requirements change?

We should make reasonable accommodations to bring as many platforms into the ecosystem as we can and try to reduce the cost of implementations where possible. The choices that we make today affect the rate of growth in the reach of all of the content we create, affect the level of consumer choice, and the affordability of products that let people bring these new technologies into their homes or take them on the go.

Online content continues to move forward in supplanting expensive physical distribution and we should advocate solutions that make sense in this space. We can continue to discuss how certain device classes or IC's support level 4.1, but then we already know this to be true. This anecdotal information doesn't move us forward towards a big picture solution.

[Dark Shikari]

20Mbps is more than enough for virtually any 1080 video to look nice and sharpI have a number of real-life clips from shows like Planet Earth that actually choke (quants >30) at 50 megabits, let alone 20.

By the way, High Level 4.0 is 25 megabits, not 20.

[DigitAl56K]

Our proposed profile is 20Mbits with the goal of incorporating many STB/DTV decoders.

[Doom9]

But can any settop box (and I haven't actually found any specs for the AVC streams in DVB-S2.. and the max transponder rate per channel is higher than 20mbit though) be leveraged to play anything from a harddisk or from a network?

Decoding 50Mbps will burn batteries much faster than 20Mbps in portable devices and increase heatIs that an assumption or proven fact? We probably should ask neuron2 to chime in here

The maximum average rate to fit 90 minutes of video on a dual layer DVD is about 12.5Mbps including audioBut we could use a lot more for peaks.. with 1 CD DivX rips we have an average bitrate of say 700kbit.. but the maximum bitrate can go up way above 2 times that.. so with 12.5mbits we're already maxed out at 160% of the average bitrate.

50Mbps will not stream reliably over wireless GWell.. whomever tries that is.. well... not so smart (and that's sugarcoated until there's no tomorrow). Wireless never has been and never will be a suitable way to transfer high bitrate content. a/b/g/n it doesn't matter, there's a reason we have Ethernet - yes wiring the old house was a pain but now I have good reason to flame laughable attempts at trying to do without cables.

It may be a long time before the majority of people have internet connections approaching anywhere near 50Mbps.That may be true, but is there only streaming over the Internet? What about playing your Blu-ray backups from a NAS? If you wanna look ahead at potential other uses, why discard one of the most likely scenarios?

My home connection is 5-7Mbps and it hasn't improved any in the past 3 years. Many people will not like to hear this but it's because the US is a second world country as far as broadband is concerned.. 10 years ago, we had no broadband except for selected locations where small cable provider started out. 3 years ago, I had a little over 1/10th of the bandwidth I have today - at the same price (at today's exchange rate it's something like $55 a month for 15mbit), and it's not like I live in Sweden, South Korea or Japan (we're still a second rate broadband country compared to those). I could have 50mbit today (at an exorbitant price though) and 100mbit offers have already been announced for next year.. and it's a matter of when and not if until most houses have fibre (I figure 2010 will be the year they get around to the smaller cities like the one I live in).

Anyway, I think we can argue this to death but I'd just like to reiterate that with DivX, when the certification was made there was no silicone whereas today, there's a two digit number of standalone players out there already and they're all capable of profile 4.1 - and all those NMTs and Co are also selling. And unlike my DVB-S2 STB, the NMT actually plays content that doesn't come in via the Coax cable (the STB can record to an USB HD or if I'd have gotten the more expensive model it would've also streamed to my PC but nothing in the datasheet said something about the reverse way (plus for the price differential I already got a Popcornhour). Seeing that AVC is far from being the dominant codec in the digital TV world (and the majority of all STBs being unable to handle anything but MPEG-2) to me it feels like a missed opportunity not to leverage the existing installed base and the fact that many chipset maker will have no choice but to create a profile 4.1 chipset.

[CruNcher]

"interoperability" is just a nice new age buzzword though in reality it hardly exists for average consumers :D

Patent Holder Company A Device not compatible with files of Patent Holder Company B and vice versa (different way of .MP4 implementation different way of DRM implementation) now customers get angry write to Company A: "Hey our files we want to play from Device B don't play (Millions write) Company A now says: "Ouch dumb consumers realized it let's bring out a update and make Company B files working". Most of the time it even doesn't depend on different DRM technologies even user created content that plays on Device A doesn't have to play on Device B (and then we come to the whole transcoding mess situation or remuxing or special muxing or whatever else they thought of in their crazy minds after the meetings ;)).
That is the sad truth in terms of "interoperability" for average consumers these days, sorry but then companies should not be surprised that consumers try to get this "interoperability" done by themselves. I really wonder a lot of times why so much people meet in VCEG meetings to create a standard that later in reality isn't working for the consumer @ all, because everyone of them does their little different thing later anyways, especially the Big ones involved in the front not even the relatively small implementers bellow (the small puppies that do the wide scale distribution for them).
Maybe it's just because these Guys don't meet with the Consumer satisfaction in mind @ all ;)

[Shinigami-Sama]

Our proposed profile is 20Mbits with the goal of incorporating many STB/DTV decoders.

not even full level 4 support?
lol

[popper]

Say what you mean, rather than being unspecific and having others interpret your words to mean what they say, rather than what you meant. But here's the facts:

There is almost zero penetration of HD, file-based media in the current market.

iPods, DivX players, all that: its all standard-def.

That's why DivX thinks they should use MKV: its not as if any other container is any more common in the hardware world for HD.How? The new MKVs will still play just fine on old players.

There is no chipset in existence that plays 5.1.

If it existed, it would cost thousands of dollars.

The vast majority of "not level 4.1" files are really level 4.1 compliant anyways; you just have to change the header flags.


No, they choose a level because it costs enormous sums of money to implement a chipset that can decode ultra-HD video in realtime, and there's no point in doing so when nobody needs it.

Given that I personally know the guy who handles Youtube's encoding, I'd think I'd know this better than you: its because its just much easier to do it that way, because people tend to game the system. At Youtube, for example, people would upload FLV files with hexedited headers to breach the max bitrate limits.By the way, Zoome lets all users upload up to 1.5 megabit H.264 without re-encoding, and Nico Nico Douga lets premium users upload H.264 without re-encoding.

Try implementing CoreAVC in an ASIC.


:devil: Everyone knows all the worlds OEMs should be using FPGA in all their video kit today anyway, far more flexable than ASIC, and mass CPE FPGA uptake would bring the price down even faster.

todays FPGA is far better than any old school fixed ASIC, as you can reflash it with your errata fixed code later,and even offer programable hardware FPGA updates for new services/options if you had the will to design and produce it and grow your product lines, hell just having the ability to add new codecs to the base hardware would be a massive boom to any future market place.

http://www.videsignline.com/howto/212200949;jsessionid=Q5ZK5U4UVESUKQSNDLPSKH0CJUNN2JVN?pgno=2
".....
Video encoding with low-cost FPGAs
.....

While inexpensive digital signal processors (DSPs) can handle the processing and encoding for a single channel of D1 video; the processing complexity involved with multiple channels or even for a single channel of HD video requires FPGAs.

This is where the parallel signal processing resources of an FPGA are critical. The encoder designed for these systems must be flexible enough to handle different resolutions and a different number of channels.
.....
"
remember also i asked CoreAVC BetaBoy about weather he was using forsight and readying his codebase for FPGA, DSP and PPC/Altivec SOC, apparently ,they are not interested in that (programable) HW side,and thats a shame.

so it will have to be a 3rd party that takes any code (x264 /ffmpeg perhaps?) and refactors it for FPGA in the future, and perhaps puts it on a USB Encoder/Decoder stick in some fashion !..... as the first end user affordable L4.1 AVC HD Encoder/decoder.

OC theres always other ways for instance i found this interesting
http://www.videsignline.com/howto/212400574
By building a transcoder on top of the RapidMind platform, this application is now able to run on a variety of processors, including CPUs, GPUs, and the Cell BE, and can also scale up to future multi-core (and many-core) processors as they become available.



just a thought OC, but the potential and perhaps the market is there for someone to try and take....

[Atak_Snajpera]

Our proposed profile is 20Mbits with the goal of incorporating many STB/DTV decoders.
Dark shikari is right. Max bitrate in High Profile lv. 4.0 is 25 MBps not 20!

AAC is nice surround solution with much friendlier licensing than most other formats (Vorbis aside), and will work with many more receivers than Vorbis will for the near-medium term future

AC3 and DTS are more popular. It's like trying to replace old good .mp3 format. (personally i prefer Vorbis though :)

[squid_80]

AC3 and DTS are more popular. It's like trying to replace old good .mp3 format. (personally i prefer Vorbis though :)
I suspect much friendlier licensing = cheaper royalties.

[khagaroth]

Simplest solution for this mess would be to make it mandatory for the decoding devices to ignore any level signaling and try to decode everything you throw at it, this will allow decoding of some 90+ percent of current files and you will be still safe as only L4 will be supported officially.

[popper]

I think our discussions frequently lose sight of use cases and interoperability. We're currently discussing H.264 at rates up to 50Mbps (which is completely over the top for almost any content) and questioning why we don't use m2ts, for example.

Do we all agree that:

20Mbps is more than enough for virtually any 1080 video to look nice and sharp
More devices should be able to do level 4.0 than level 4.1, now (STBs) and in the future (portable players)
Decoding 50Mbps will burn batteries much faster than 20Mbps in portable devices and increase heat
The maximum average rate to fit 90 minutes of video on a dual layer DVD is about 12.5Mbps including audio
50Mbps will not stream reliably over wireless G. Keep in mind that N is draft and many devices have quite a lag in supporting new wireless standards. Most N routers (under $100) also share the 2.4Ghz band with G devices, reducing throughput. Most 5Ghz routers run into the $100-200 price range and dual band routers are $200+
It may be a long time before the majority of people have internet connections approaching anywhere near 50Mbps. My home connection is 5-7Mbps and it hasn't improved any in the past 3 years. ISPs are also trying to throttle rather than increase capacity.
We'd all like to see a lot of hardware supporting MKV with guaranteed support for metadata, chapters, multilingual audio, etc.
Consistent subtitle support is important. Nobody likes keeping their subs in 3 different formats in case the other two don't work properly
AAC is nice surround solution with much friendlier licensing than most other formats (Vorbis aside), and will work with many more receivers than Vorbis will for the near-medium term future


Developing a format specification involves thinking about not just about what top-end/DVD devices will do today but what devices can be brought into the ecosystem tomorrow. Considering all of the technologies that we want to work with, if we draw a "interoperability" line in the sand in terms of requirements and we think about all of the devices now and future, what falls on either side of that line as the requirements change?

We should make reasonable accommodations to bring as many platforms into the ecosystem as we can and try to reduce the cost of implementations where possible. The choices that we make today affect the rate of growth in the reach of all of the content we create, affect the level of consumer choice, and the affordability of products that let people bring these new technologies into their homes or take them on the go.

Online content continues to move forward in supplanting expensive physical distribution and we should advocate solutions that make sense in this space. We can continue to discuss how certain device classes or IC's support level 4.1, but then we already know this to be true. This anecdotal information doesn't move us forward towards a big picture solution.

sorry i have to agree with Doom9, your talking about making your "blue sky" AVC subset Divx7 ecosystem for the long term future, and yet your trying to talk people into the past capabilitys, and a subset max of that at best, and thats using the usual US model here, that being "its better than Mpeg2!".

newsflash, the world (is not the USA), has, and is moving to "DVB-*(2)" and putting TS (transport streams) AVC in there,for delivery, the STBs,HD DVD, BR are moving to or use TS already and just about all the world is talking up and finally making a move to DVB AVC H@l4.1 capable IPtv,(thats why WE NEED the open TS tools right now, and why i keep asking for them.)

the DVB-* framework gives you something like 36Mbit per channel real work throughput today, and its only getting better with time as DVB-*2 steps up production, any DVB-C2 and DVB-H2 seems to be late to the party, we have DVB-T2 already.

http://www.dvb.org/technology/fact_sheets/DVB-S2%20Fact%20Sheet.0408.pdf

thats curently around 36Mbit per chanel usable depending on what modulation you set at both ends etc....

DVB-SCENE27.pdf shows you the realitys of were its all going soon enough, and less than stadard H@L4.1, divx7 20Mbit max isnt it for your average end users paying the bills, and buying the kit to make your longterm profits, outside the US OC.

http://www.dvb.org/news_events/dvbscene_magazine/DVB-SCENE27.pdf

page 4 of 16
"DVB-S2 Enables 140 Mbps Super Hi-Vision By Satellite At IBC 2008
Dr Alberto Morello,
Director of RAI Research and Technology Innovation Centre, Turin, Italy & Chairman of DVB TM-S2 Group

One of the highlights of this year’s IBC in Amsterdam is the first broadcast, live by satellite, of Super Hi-Vision (SHV)
using DVB-S2, from the RAI Research up-link station in Turin.

SHV, the 4000 line x 8000 pixels/line television system under development by NHK,"

Since the native SHV signal bit rate is a massive 24 Gbit/s, the major part of the challenge has been in developing technical ways of delivering the service to the final user. SHV is in our case compressed using MPEG-4 AVC at a final bit-rate of around 140 Mbit/sand delivered to IBC in Amsterdam from the up-link station of the research headquarters of Italian public broadcaster RAI in Turin, over Ku-band satellite capacity provided by Eutelsat.
"
sure SHV is not going to get here anytime soon (within 5 years), but your divx7 proposition today ,becomes tomorrows legacy, 25Mbit max H@4.1 is the standard we have today, you want to stroke the vendors pockets and say its ok, your can get away with 20Mbit max, and thats just plain wrong for the upcoming world market place ....

as the world moves away from the analogue the the digital DVB, we need a far better base for the futures legacy, than your tunnel vision quick quid/buck proposal, the long term money for drip ,drip, comes later, not when your trying to move people wholesale to digitl for real...

OC the Uk has its failings in that we have had DVB-* a very long time now, and the official govt stance should have been re-enforce the newest current AVC DVB-*2 model and kit for our transition, but alas not....,the old drip drip, of milking the old DVB Mpeg2 only kit for the last bit of juice prevailed on high.

:devil: infact i think you should all just dump your US framerate specs and just move back to the original world standard UK Pal 50MHz/100Mhx and later , 200 Mhz ,a nice, simple 25,50,100,* FPS for all the world to use.

you can keep 24FPS for film OC / :devil:

BTW, in case you missed it, the UKs cable firm virgin media that covers 50% of the whole Uk, have began the rollout of 50 Mbit/s download (with a crep upload sure), but even so , even many US cable vendors have 30Mbit/s download packages available today, so again your perfectly able to take a full H@L4.1 if you really wanted to download stream it, OC if the worlds ISPs just turned on and stopped filtering Multicast to and from their payng end users worldwide, then everyone could start broadband innovating again with DVB AVC Multicast streaming in many forms..... but thats OT but related for this thread OC so....

and this is what the world wants and is moving to, the so called real "BIG picture" and reality too, so much for your "This anecdotal information doesn't move us forward towards a big picture solution "

http://www.etsi.org/WebSite/Technologies/NextGenerationNetworks.aspx

[popper]

DigitAl56K said:"Decoding 50Mbps will burn batteries much faster than 20Mbps in portable devices and increase heat"

Doom9 said "Is that an assumption or proven fact? We probably should ask neuron2 to chime in here"

assumed, it would seem, many people do ;) sure, perhaps it may use a little more juice and give you 2 minutes less playtime, but thats not a given,depending on how it operates...., but nowere near draining the batteries "MUCH FASTER" as DIgital56k would have you beleave.

just a very quick search brings you this mobile/handheld chipset/SOC (OC you could also use it in USB stick and the like , anyone doing that today), not as flexable as FPGA OC ;) and not a PPC SOC ;) ;) but its cheap and flexible, and Ohh look...
"Each chip is a real-time H.264/MPEG4-AVC High Definition (level 4.1) Encoder/Decoder (Codec) that provides the ideal mix of flexibility and power efficiency for consumer electronics
applications....."

"full HD (1920x1080). Qpixel
is also raising the power-performance bar by being the first to offer
full HD H.264 encoding at less than 275 mW of power,"

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS10020+02-Jun-2008+BW20080602
Industry's Lowest-Power Full HD H.264 Codecs With the Broadest Feature Set Unveiled...
Sun Jun 1, 2008 8:00pm EDT

[SeeMoreDigital]

the DVB-* framework gives you something like 36Mbit per channel real work throughput today...Hmmm....

According to Humax's FoxSat-HD set-top box specification, the maximum input bit-rate is 15Mbps: -

http://i43.tinypic.com/96jmeo.png

[Snowknight26]

It actually says 15MB/s, so 120Mbps.

[STaRGaZeR]

It actually says 15MB/s, so 120Mbps.

H.264 HP@L4 can't remotely reach that bitrate.

[CruNcher]

sure not i guess it just shows of what the chip is maximal capable of @ it's peak i guess :) in marketing you should always remind the reader of what the product is capable of if it's useful or not isn't really important ;) it would be future proof that way for SHDV broadcast reception :P

[popper]

Hmmm....

According to Humax's FoxSat-HD set-top box specification, the maximum input bit-rate is 15Mbps: -

http://i43.tinypic.com/96jmeo.png

as per the PDF link above
http://www.dvb.org/technology/fact_sheets/DVB-S2%20Fact%20Sheet.0408.pdf

the chipset on your old Mpeg2 only DVB-S2 seems more than able to take the current DVB-S2 Mbit rate spec at 8PSK then.

Useful Bitrate (Mbit/s) , DVB-S2 , 58.8 (gain = 32%)

[RealNC]

When you go to Youtube and you try to upload a .mkv file, guess what? No. You can't.

Every video I ever uploaded to YouTube so far was an mkv (H.264 video + Vorbis audio). Lately they even show in 720p if you click the "Watch in HD" link :confused:

Edit:
Proof: http://i43.tinypic.com/10ggwop.png

[DrNein]

Every video I ever uploaded to YouTube so far was an mkv (H.264 video + Vorbis audio). Lately they even show in 720p if you click the "Watch in HD" link :confused:

Edit:
Proof: http://i43.tinypic.com/10ggwop.png

And yet it is HD only nominally by resolution, not in quality or bitrate density. That is, 720p requires about 8Mbps not to make a complete mockery of the term "High Definition" (high clarity of detail) so that if 2Mbps is the limit for streaming purposes then they should be using 320p instead and just calling it HQ or such versus previous.

[DrNein]

I also agree that L4.1 AVC in TS/M2TS is more practical than limiting to L4.0 and trying to promote MKV. I suppose the company prefers the path of a sort of proprietary niche even if a subset of standards. But it does seem backwards both to resist the "universal standard" and to be biased towards the low-end.

It was enthusiasts who really propelled ASP to common usage -i.e. simple hack of pre-standard Microsoft implementation when use was artificially limited to a proprietary ASF container. MS turned away from MPEG-4 development but eventually produced a standardized VC-1 rather than remain proprietary only.

The same enthusiasts who embraced ASP have already transitioned to AVC and while they largely choose MKV and are not necessarily concerned with best quality (not unlike common ASP usage), I doubt they will embrace a subset offered by DivX Inc. since they are more interested in playback anywhere -which will not be the case with such a scheme, one way or the other.

The tiny display device market is something all together different and already well covered by Apple's AVC/MOV variant anyway.

So, what DivX Inc. should probably be doing is embracing AVC/TS or at least AVC/MKV and the creation and promotion of interoperable files inclusive of the hardware that is already universal.

This is not a repeat of ASP since DivX Inc. is late to the party this time rather than early (even so, the hardware took too long). AVC hardware has existed for some time already so that should be the target.

[delacroixp]

It would be nice to have a 3840x2160@50fps movie format that everyone could enjoy in their own home.
(A very big screen, a top-end surround sound-system, an Airbus A380 as personal transport and lifestyle to match ... would also be good to go)

DivX has never been about 1 or 2 rich kids that can afford the latest, the greatest and even the futuristic.
DivX popularised movie content from the internet and by doing well they also did good.
They made 'the blind' enjoy the home movie experience ... which expanded the market ... which ultimately created the financial resources for HD and Blu-ray to thrive and prosper.
Let's face it, home entertainment may never rival movies at the cinema for sheer quality and super-realistic immersion.
Few people even have access to IMAX-3D or to some of the more exotic formats of 'sensory-realistic' entertainment.

Home entertainment is largely a market of disposable TV-series, forgettable movies and shallow experience. The 24/7 easy access has made blissfull ignorants of us all.
However, Div 7 has the potential to create a level of entertainment that most people can afford and appreciate .... and may even include many other people who were completely 'off the grid'.


It's all good
:):devil::D
Pascal

[delacroixp]

Is there a codec on the drawing board, designed to deal with the massive ammounts of dataflow from a 3840x2160x50 (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=142430) movie format (perhaps even a dual-stream 3D format) ... albeit only playable on a Cray (http://www.cray.com/Home.aspx) or SGI (http://www.sgi.com/vue/) supercomputer (http://www.top500.org/) , at present ?


It's all good
:):devil::D
Pascal

[hajj_3]

divx 7.1 seems to be out, cant find a changelog on their site or forums or even doom9 forums. Here's the installer tho: http://download.divx.com/divx/DivXInstaller.exe

[poisondeathray]

divx 7.1 seems to be out, cant find a changelog on their site or forums or even doom9 forums. Here's the installer tho: http://download.divx.com/divx/DivXInstaller.exe


DivX 7.1

Divx Player updated to 7.1.0

* New Skin

The DivX Player has been refreshed with an update to the skin.

* H.264/MKV/AAC playback support

The DivX Player now supports playback of H.264 and MKV files and AAC audio tracks if you have the Media Pack or Proversion.

AAC Decoder updated to 7.1.0



http://www.videohelp.com/tools/DivX_5/version-history#changelog

[hajj_3]

very poor changelog, was hoping for updating divx converter functionality and native .mp4 playback at the very least.

[delacroixp]

Pretty soon we'll all be watching 6 mega-pixel stereoscopic movies with 64-bit color.

I guess 16 CPU's, 512 gb RAM and a 1600 watt PSU is only entry level for a supercomputer (Cray CX1 (http://www.cray.com/products/CX1.aspx) , video (http://www.cray.com/Assets/Demos/cx1/index.html)) .
However, it seams like only yesterday that I had a IBM PS2 (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2990562#post2990562) with room for 4 mb RAM (1987) .

It's all good !


:):devil::D
Pascal

[shinedot]

Pretty soon we'll all be watching 6 mega-pixel stereoscopic movies with 64-bit color.

I guess 16 CPU's, 512 gb RAM and a 1600 watt PSU is only entry level for a supercomputer (Cray CX1 (http://www.cray.com/products/CX1.aspx) , video (http://www.cray.com/Assets/Demos/cx1/index.html)) .
However, it seams like only yesterday that I had a IBM PS2 (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2990562#post2990562) with room for 4 mb RAM (1987) .

It's all good !


:):devil::D
Pascal

its all good. agree, but not for mother earth :)

steroscopic movies with 64bpp soon? well i think not so soon.