View Full Version : Xvid 1.0????
jurij
5th June 2003, 16:53
Hi you all, i would like to ask just a simple question:
What is the status of xvid?
i mean how stable is it?
to koepi:
Can you do something simple like a list of things which need still to be worked on before expecting a stable 1.0 release? thanx :)
very few lines....
You all know my thoughts on people that wait for a "1.0" magic version ;)
Could someone else answer this, before I close it.
-Nic
Feature list is frozen, 1.0 will have everything current unstable has except B-frames VHQ. Unless you encounter bugs in the current unstable, there will be no difference to you between current unstable and XviD Stable 1.0™.
kastro68
5th June 2003, 20:02
In my opinion Xvid is already stable...well I guess it depends on how you define "stable".
1.0 would probably be more optimised for speed.
TaZ4hvn
5th June 2003, 20:52
Just consider 1.0 for XviD as PI (3.14159...) for LaTeX, an asymptotic perfect build number :D
snowbeach
5th June 2003, 22:54
currently i am using ver 1.0. it is pretty stable... :D
TheXung
6th June 2003, 04:23
Originally posted by mf
Feature list is frozen, 1.0 will have everything current unstable has except B-frames VHQ. Unless you encounter bugs in the current unstable, there will be no difference to you between current unstable and XviD Stable 1.0™.
What about cartoon mode? I thought 1.0 would have the merging of isbaar's branch to dev-api-4. I usually don't keep track of the branch and was under the assumption that it split before some of the features like trellis and R-D vhq. Have I been holding out on my cartoons for no reason?
Originally posted by TheXung
What about cartoon mode? I thought 1.0 would have the merging of isbaar's branch to dev-api-4. I usually don't keep track of the branch and was under the assumption that it split before some of the features like trellis and R-D vhq. Have I been holding out on my cartoons for no reason?
This is only what I've heard, and it could be false. I expect sysKin to come with a reply and call me baka again for providing false information :D.
Anyway, the way I see it, it would be pretty stupid to use api4 for a "stable" release, since it only even compiles since a few weeks. But then again I could be greatly misinformed.
ciper
6th June 2003, 10:01
No bframes nor VHQ?? Why? Shouldn't that be in version 1.0? I wouldn't mind waiting for 1.0 a bit longer and have bframes and VHQ
to me version 1.0 is magical .. is so round :D .. i hate versions like 0.54, 0.97, heck .. what ugly number versions .. One means perfection.. like "It is the One .." or "The One version to rule them all..."
/me ducks
Originally posted by ciper
No bframes nor VHQ?? Why? Shouldn't that be in version 1.0? I wouldn't mind waiting for 1.0 a bit longer and have bframes and VHQ
Don't twist my words. I said "No B-frames VHQ", I didn't say "No B-frames nor VHQ". What I mean of course is VHQ for B-Frames.
Sigmatador
6th June 2003, 10:08
LOL, nic's prefered subject!! :D
ciper
6th June 2003, 10:10
I didn't twisted the words, fist of all i though that VHQ didn't work only with GMC, and not with bframes too, and you have to agree with me that "No bframes VHQ" might be a little bit ambiguous.. :cool:
Originally posted by ciper
I didn't twisted the words, fist of all i though that VHQ didn't work only with GMC, and not with bframes too, and you have to agree with me that "No bframes VHQ" might be a little bit ambiguous.. :cool:
There were simply no routines for VHQ on B-frames. That means you can use them, but they just won't have any effect on B-frames. B-frames VHQ means VHQ routines for B-frames, so that they both work on P and B frames. Get it now?
Garfield
6th June 2003, 10:28
Originally posted by ciper
I didn't twisted the words, fist of all i though that VHQ didn't work only with GMC, and not with bframes too, and you have to agree with me that "No bframes VHQ" might be a little bit ambiguous.. :cool:
What mf means is that vhq won't do anything on a b-frames, vhq is currently working on p-frames afaik, that doesn't mean that vhq and b-frames don't work together, only that vhq has no effect on them
Edit : 2 minutes late :/
ciper
6th June 2003, 10:37
Got it ;)
sysKin
6th June 2003, 10:40
Originally posted by mf
This is only what I've heard, and it could be false. I expect sysKin to come with a reply and call me baka again for providing false information :D.
Anyway, the way I see it, it would be pretty stupid to use api4 for a "stable" release, since it only even compiles since a few weeks. But then again I could be greatly misinformed. Here I am!
mf-baka! You provide false information:D :D :D :D :D :devil:
Current dev-api-4 will become XviD 1.0 (it currently is 1.-1).
You're right mf, it's not tested yet, but it's the main goal of 1.0 - it provides accurate 2-pass for bframes (and for all platforms), has new api (not 2.1 + hacks) and everything else the magic number (1.0) needs.
VHQ _for_ bframes (see my signature) didn't make it for 1.0, and don't worry, it's not that useful (or maybe it's buggy, in which case it's even better not to have it in 1.0). It will be available in 1.1 alpha of course :)
As for "anime mode" - I really hope it will be there, but I've never seen this mysterious branch...
Radek
Originally posted by sysKin
Here I am!
mf-baka! You provide false information:D :D :D :D :D :devil:
;______;
Current dev-api-4 will become XviD 1.0 (it currently is 1.-1).
You're right mf, it's not tested yet, but it's the main goal of 1.0 - it provides accurate 2-pass for bframes (and for all platforms), has new api (not 2.1 + hacks) and everything else the magic number (1.0) needs.
Shouldn't we call that unstable first and have lots of n00bs test it, and THEN rebrand it to 1.0 stable?
kastro68
6th June 2003, 16:44
Originally posted by mf
;______;
Shouldn't we call that unstable first and have lots of n00bs test it, and THEN rebrand it to 1.0 stable?
Somehow I feel insulted by this remark, lol.
Originally posted by kastro68
Somehow I feel insulted by this remark, lol.
Whoops, old habit ():>
BiaTch 5.0
7th June 2003, 03:55
Considering a new XviD with so many different fixes/bugs that you have to reconsider/retest your selected settings gets released very often I don’t see how it could be called beta or 1.0 :P .
TheXung
7th June 2003, 05:01
Originally posted by BiaTch 5.0
Considering a new XviD with so many different fixes/bugs that you have to reconsider/retest your selected settings gets released very often I don’t see how it could be called beta or 1.0 :P .
In theory, dev-api-4 shouldn't have that many core changes. It's really a new gui/api. In theory, all the plugins were ported perfectly from the current gui.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.