h264

[shiro_clanclan]

People need to grow up sometime. CCCP provides everything you'd need to play any format, so there you go when it comes to PCs. VLC and QuickTime take care of the Mac folks.

People are stupid? Yes. But that doesn't mean that you have to do crappy encoding to make up for it. Besides, going by the "people are stupid" theory, stuffing h264 into AVI wouldn't solve the issue. Because they'd download it and, being stupid, complain that it doesn't work becasue WMP says it can't download the codec.

But yeah... the #1 peeve... are the ones who use DivX and never check the "Hide DivX Logo" box, then do video editing with DivX or XviD source. >.<

This is going terribly off-topic, methinks. XP

[Cloyce]

Hey, be quite, it's only a example.

You say WMP will not download the codec, but that's not true,
because Microsoft supports H264. And if the FourCC of your AVI file
is H264, WMP will search for codec on the web. (On my PC, WMP handles
AVI-H264 without problems)
Newer versions of WMP and Quicktime, are both enabled to decode H264
video content,
(in Quicktime you can also Encode H264 content if you upgrade to Pro)
so, Windows users must only upgrade to WMP 11 to decode
AVI-H264 files.

You say people need to grow up sometimes, and CCCP or any other
codec develope community work for this.
Ok, I agree with you. But people need something called "marketing"
because if nobody knows about CCCP nobody will download CCCP's stuffs and CCCP will never have enough money for this.

If you enter into a common elettronic shop, you will see a lot of
DivX-compliant DVD decoders and (only recently) some XviD Decoders,
why?

[Zero1]

mmm... I found some posts like this on TorrentPortal

" MKV, What hell is this? I tried to play it in WMedia Player
But it doesn't work, please help me u_u"

Remember, there are o lot of stupid people around the web! ^^" (80%?)
And there are also people who don't understand the difference between
XviD and DivX! X.X
Why? The reason is very simple, when you install the official DivX
codec on your PC, as default decoder configuration, the following
options are checked:
"Support decoding for generic MPEG-4 video "
"Show DivX logo watermark"

So, if you put a XviD-video AVI into a VideoPlayer, you will SEE
the DivX logowatermark impressed on the video!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
["Support decoding for generic MPEG-4 video " ^^]

The strange thing, is when you try to put the same AVI file into
the DivX Player (installed with DivX codec as default), in fact, an
error mesage will prompt out :
"the FourCC is XviD ...." or same thing like that.. ^^

So, for stupid people, I use stupid video format (avi).
At least they'll download it.

Hmm. Really there is no difference between XviD and DivX. Both are MPEG-4 ASP CODECs, that is they produce a bitstream with the same syntax. The quality of the encoding and how the encoders do it can be different, but the structure of the output is the same, meaning that a fully implemented MPEG-4 ASP decoder can decode XviD or DivX encodes (but wait, I will come to this in a minute).

As for the FourCC; this is partly a result of DivX's meddling and screwing up standards. The "official" FourCC for DivX and XviD encodes is MP4V (MPEG-4 Video). If the DivX players are worth anything at all, they should decode DivX or XviD encodes with the FourCC set as MP4V; if not then you can set an XviD encodes FourCC to DivX to fool the player into playing it.

Now there are some features in XviD that will produce files that you cannot play on a standalone DivX player. This isn't because XviD is different or anything, it's still compliant; it's because DivX only partially implemented the decoding of MPEG-4 ASP encodes; that is they only support what their encoder software makes use of. So XviD may not work, simply because DivX players do not support all the MPEG-4 ASP features, it's not a problem with XviD itself.

I really quite hate DivX for how they have mangled the general usage of the MPEG-4 ASP spec (it's a knock on effect, kind of follow the leader, but in this case the leader was doing it wrong and it goes down the line).

You can read more DivX hate here:
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.ph ... tcount=263

It's pretty long, so here is a highlight of the interesting part:

Then you get hardware. Since MPEG-4 ASP has effectively been partitioned as DivX and XviD, almost implying that they are different codecs, or somehow incompatible, you get "DivX" players, not MPEG-4 ASP players, but "DivX" players. You might say, "hang on, what about the incompatibilities I've seen", well that's a combination of people using AVI and VfW, and DivX disregarding the specs somewhat, and creating their own unofficial profiles. One of these was due to DivX's half assed GMC decoding implementation which only used to support 1 warp point, if you know XviD, you may know it uses 3. I believe (though I might be wrong) that a compliant decoder should support all the features of a selected profile, that would mean that the DivX decoders and players would be able to decode up to 6 warp point GMC (the maximum available). In other words, if a decoder claims to be an ASP decoder, it should support ALL of the features of ASP fully, and not partially implemented.

Again, this goes back to DivX's name and disregard for the specs.

Players that are not obligated to decode XviD encodes, because they are made to DivX Networks specifications. That means they are only guaranteed to decode DivX encodes (which means that there is only partial implementation of ASP decoding features). If it was a MPEG-4 ASP player, it would have to play any compliant MPEG-4 ASP stream, meaning that there should be no issue of compatibility between DivX and XviD encodes, barring the fact that they use hacks for VfW compatibility. That would mean (if DivX, XviD and libavcodec decoders follow the spec) that you could use any ASP feature you wanted without worry, be it GMC, QPEL or B-frames. It's an excuse for opensource, since they are only people doing it in their free time, but a company should do things properly, especially when they expect people to pay for their products.

In my opinion, since DivX3.11a, the knock on effect of MPEG-4 in AVI has been damaging. Given that DivX 3.11a was a hack, it didn't do or require anything particularly undesirable specs (AVI/VfW) wise (as opposed to ASP which uses B-frames and requiring hacks). Maybe SBC's/Nandub's Low/Fast motion DLL switching was a bit naughty, I don't know, it was before my time :p.

Why do I think DivX3.11a had a damaging knock on effect? Well basically (I guess) people was labelling the encodes as DivX, or DivX SBC to differentiate from MSMPEG4 (which I believe is a non standard simple profile implementation). Then comes natural progression, DivX (several versions later) eventually moved to ASP (which means B-frames, yay!). So as not to upset their userbase, they thought it wise to stick with AVI and just develop a hack called packed bitstream, which basically packs P and B frames together so two frames get forced through and read at once, since VfW has a one frame in, one frame out limitation (you need multiple frames to decode B-frames).

Even later on down the line, we see the .divx format, which is nothing more than AVI with even more hacks. These hacks are even more evil though in my opinion. Yes, I'm talking about dual audio and menus in AVI. Yes, about dual audio, it is possible with AVI, but the default splitter supplied with Windows does not support it AFAIK (which accounts for like 99% of people using Windows). I think you will probably just get 2 audio streams playing at once. I don't know, and don't care to find out if Haali's splitter has the capability; I'm content with MKV and MP4.

IF YOU WANT DUAL AUDIO AND/OR MENUS, CONTRIBUTE TO MP4 AND/OR MKV RATHER THAN WASTING MANPOWER HACKING OLD FORMATS, AND HINDERING THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEWER ONES.

But no, they are content to stick with packed bitstreams and/or frame lag, and CBR audio (or VBR if you don't mind a workaround).

It's not so much the "hacking" that bothers me, it's that it's counter productive. There are capable, well implemented AND opensource projects out there, that would be grateful for some help.

Had people have done things "right" all those years ago, we would be seeing DivX and XviD encodes, no, MPEG-4 ASP encodes in MP4 (no, this isn't an MP4 hoaring, it's just the simple fact that MP4 existed before MKV and would have been used instead of AVI), and the general support (although very, very good even right now) would be much higher. The fact that it's an ISO standard means companies are happy to implement it. I mean just look at the amount of mobile phones that support .mp4, you also have the iPod, and the PSP (which requires some custom atom I believe).

This is why I believe it's important to use H.264 as a fresh start. We are already doing the right thing by creating native streams (read: non hacked for VfW), and for the most part people refer to it as H.264. Also some people are using the native container (MP4), and others with requirements that MP4 does not aim to fulfil (due to the intention of interoperability), such as AC3, or the opensource softsub formats, use MKV (one thing I don't get is when people put H.264 + AAC in MKV, and don't make use of a single MKV feature, not softsubs, not even chapters). Sometimes you get AVC thrown in, but maybe that's just a dual standard we will end up living with, think anime; do you call a short series an OAV (original animated video) or an OVA (original video animation)?

I'm not a complete specs Nazi, I just dislike the actions of idiot people that makes stuff incompatible.

Hey, be quite, it's only a example.

You say WMP will not download the codec, but that's not true,
because Microsoft supports H264. And if the FourCC of your AVI file
is H264, WMP will search for codec on the web. (On my PC, WMP handles
AVI-H264 without problems)

I have never seen or heard of a Microsoft H.264 decoder, and if one did exist, it would almost certainly be for directshow, not Video for Windows (AVI is Video for Windows, MP4/MKV is/can be directshow). So that theory wouldn't work. Microsoft don't even have an MPEG-4 ASP decoder for download.

Newer versions of WMP and Quicktime, are both enabled to decode H264
video content,
(in Quicktime you can also Encode H264 content if you upgrade to Pro)
so, Windows users must only upgrade to WMP 11 to decode
AVI-H264 files.

I have been able to decode H.264 in AVI in WMP10, IIRC WMP9 too, and I bet 7 + 8 would work too.
Quicktime has limited H.264 support at best, and almost certainly won't support H.264 in AVI.

Ok, I agree with you. But people need something called "marketing"
because if nobody knows about CCCP nobody will download CCCP's stuffs and CCCP will never have enough money for this.

The CCCP guys check out major anime forums, and help people with video playback, they also offer an IRC channel for live help. They sometimes have banners in their signatures linking to CCCP, that is a form of marketing as such, rather advertisment. Then you also get word of mouth, like how shiro_clanclan told you about it.

If you enter into a common elettronic shop, you will see a lot of
DivX-compliant DVD decoders and (only recently) some XviD Decoders,
why?

DivX was the "first" big name in MPEG-4 SP/ASP encoders, as such they have been around and people know the name. After DivX 4, they went payware and some of the devs split off and worked on XviD as a free alternative. If the XviD team were likeminded with DivX, I have no doubt that they could make a ton out of the great name XviD has in quality encoding, but the XviD devs simply want quality opensource.

Again, please refer to my previous post for an explanation about DivX

[shiro_clanclan]

My DVD player just says "MPEG4 Compliant" on it... plays both. XP

Zero1 shoots and scores! *crowd goes wild*

[Cloyce]

Oh my God, Zero1 you are terrible @__@

Really there is no difference between XviD and DivX

Yes, I've just tried to fool the player by changing the FourCC to DivX, it works, but the decoding quality is a bit different, believe me.
So, I always leave the FourCC in XviD.

(Sorry, but I can't reply to all your post, it's too long)

My DVD player just says "MPEG4 Compliant" on it... plays both. XP

In theory, also my mobile(Motorola 3Vx) is MPEG-4 compliant. but be careful if I use XviD codec it doesn't always work, because XviD
does not apply limitation to your settings, instead of DivX, which lets you
choose a specific profile (Portable profile, Home Theater profile...) and each profile will apply a limitation on the codec behaviour in reason to ensure that it will work properly on the specific case.

So, if I put a XviD video encoded using functions like:
-Global Motion Compensation
-Quater Pixel Compensation
on your DVD decoder, it won't works, even trough it's MPEG-4 compliant.
I know about this problem, and you too, the only things we should do
is disable these options.
But in DivX it's much more simple and clear.

So, if someone uses the XviD video (not properly set)
for puting a DVD movie on a CD, and he notices that it doesn't
work on his DVD decoder.
He will say: "XviD = BAD" and "DivX = GOOD" because it works.

You know, if nowadays, DivX is still more diffused than XviD
is because it's EASY TO USE and suitable for the large part of people.
XviD is able to give better quality results only when it's properly set.

Personally, I always use XviD because it's 400% faster than DivX and
it's funny for me try different settings and observe the results.
It's suitable for me, not for all.

[shiro_clanclan]

It's really more like the Mac vs Windows argument. I use XviD because it's fast, got a nice no-bull GUI, effective, has a better decoder... yeah. And better defaults out of the box than DivX... freaking label and shiz.

As for XviD not working as well... not true. I've tested every AVI in my collection (well, every meaning an episode per series if I'm not actually watching the series on the player) and there's no difference in playback. The only things my player chokes on are scenes with a static effect, the intro to AIR (that kills so many things...) and non-standard resolutions. Which aren't anything specific to the codec... simply the processing power of the unit.

Zero1 isn't terrible, he just knows what he's talking about. o.o;;

Anyway, yeah.. way off-topic... >.<

[Willen]

It's really more like the Mac vs Windows argument. I use XviD because it's fast, got a nice no-bull GUI, effective, has a better decoder... yeah. And better defaults out of the box than DivX... freaking label and shiz.

Yeah that DivX logo, when I first saw it, annoyed the hell out of me. I think I stopped the video I was playing and turned that crap off immediately. And after they started bundling the DivX player and other crap, I stopped using it altogether. I don't need another video player installed on my computer. At the time, I had WMP, Winamp, Quicktime, Real, and probably 2 others that got installed along with software that came with my hardware.

As for h264, I think I'll wait a bit until the tools mature a little more and it gains wider support in the community before I adopt it. I personally would love if everything were h264/AVC + AAC in a MP4 container, but it's not quite time yet for that. Soon...

[shiro_clanclan]

I used to have a bunch of crap on my compy too... now it's down to WMP (music playlists) and MPC (videos). And then iTunes the random times I work with my iPod.

I'd love to work with h264 as well... but like you, I'm waiting for the tools. Until h264 works like Xvid binaries... I'll pass.

[trythil]

Until x264 works like Xvid binaries... I'll pass.

It's very close, at least from a UI standpoint:



Close enough for "works like", in my opinion.

[shiro_clanclan]

That's what I mean. One simple config, already done and ready for you to mess with outta the EXE.

And oops, I guess I may have taken a wider stand on h264... is x264 the only h264 encoder out there?

Anyway, yeah. Movin' on.