Tab. wrote:Well, apparently you missed the point of what I said entirely, because I never said ogm didn't work (though for a lot of things it doesn't, I'll go back to that in a minute).
Maybe you should finish arguing with yourself before you start trying to argue with me...seriously dude, yer startin to sound a lil freaky.
My main point was the fact that it wasn't MADE to be anything more than a little hack,
No, it was made so that people could include multiple streams in a single file, which it does perfectly...where's the fire?
as you can see pretty clearly from it's design and structure. The point is it has no future.
No future as...what? It let's you include multiple streams in a single file, it does it perfectly, why would it NEED future development? I mean I get that some people like to try and fix things that aren't broken, but really.
Koepi and some others on Doom who've invested a bunch of time into it before are trying to drag it out and say it still has a future, but there's not much more can be done with it without revamping to the scale of making a whole different container... which has already been done, and well.
...and why would they need to even do that? *once again checks one of his OGM encodes, switches to different audio tracks, switches on and off subtitles...*
Gotta love the folks at Doom9, always thinkin about how to fix things that aren't broken!
What I was saying is it's got no future, it's got nothing to do but wither out and die with it's problems that it does have n give rise to newer, more standardized, better containers.
Well you tell the kids at Doom9 to have fun tryin to make a better mouse trap, the rest of us have seen the light, the "future" as you talk about it, is now and it works just peachy.
Ogm is the toddler. It was the first container to offer the kind of all-in-one storage it does, and only because it was a mod of a pretty decently planned audio format. It's kinda like the half-accidental test tube baby that spawned a bit of a container revolution amongst encoders/distroers.
Blah, blah, blah...I'm sure you'll find a point eventually.
Now as far as stability, mkv is a lot better planned and it's not a loose mod of anything off of xiph's ogg vorbis specs. It may be younger in the field of practice, but it's much more mature as a proper format.
*Once AGAIN checks one his OGM encodes, switches to a different audio track, turns on and off subtitles*
*shrugs*
Seems pretty stable to me, not sure what yer goin on about.
As for why to use mkv over ogm BESIDES the fact that one is doomed,
It's doomed because it works and the utter brilliance floating around at Doom9 wants to try and fix something that isn't broken? *snicker*
and so far as what's wrong with ogm itself,
The fact that it works? o_O
Oh I see, you need a format that DOESN'T work, oh that make perfect sense, I've seen the light now!
those are almost completely different topics. They might be important if ogm was less.. well.. ogm, but the simple fact is that mkv can do everything ogm can and more, giving IMO little to no reason to use ogm, especially when it's got nowhere to go but down.
mkv, not only can it include multiple streams, just like ogm ALREADY CAN, but it can do ever so much more! Why it can pretend to be bit torrents or Winrar with it's awesome CRC checking. Why it can pretend to be the DVD format with it's neato menus! And in future versions we plan to include a news browser! And a mail browser! A calculator! Heck we even have plans to make it so that it can wash your car!
Gotta love that Microshaft integration way of thinkin, nice to see it's rubbed off so nicely at some of the folks over at Doom9.
What's wrong with ogm?
Oh jebus keerist, FINALLY we're gonna get to a point! *rolls eyes*
Well first off despite the fact that it's a lot more flexible than avi, it's still far too rigid.
In what way?
*Once fucking AGAIN checks one his OGM encodes, switches audio tracks, switches on and off subtitles*
Round and round we go, maybe some day we'll find a real argument in all of Tabs incoherent rambling.
All of it's identifiers are based on dshow conventions and smashed into the comments section of what's supposed to be the vorbis headers.
And that's a problem...in what way? I mean, so the headers might look a lil junky...so what? It's not like anyone is gonna be looking at the headers anyway, at least not directly.
It can only use certain video and audio codecs (getting ac3 to work in ogm is yet another hack). The only stuff that really even works is divx/xvid variants and mp3, vorbis, and pcm audio.
Because we REALLY need more audio support than MP3 and PCM... o_O
Using AC3, oh boy what a brilliant idea that is, you might save a whole 3kb! *snicker*
And what other video codecs would you need besides DivX and Xvid? Certainly there's no real need for editing codecs like Huffyuv, and if you wanted to use MPEG, you could go with the DVD format and then, huh, yeah then you don't even need OGM.
Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should. I'm sure all that brilliance over there on Doom9 could cram in support for every last video and audio codec imaginable...but uh....what for? o_O
It's got ridiculously shitty seeking.
*plays one of his OGM files, jumps to the middle, jumps back to the begining*
Hrmmm...how is the seeking shitty? Seems to work just fine for me. Sounds more like a problem with you video player than with OGM.
The subtitle filter's compatibility has been totally screwed up since the beginning, I don't even know if it ever got past the point of not working on win9x, but it sure as hell doesn't work on mine (XP).
The know it all can't get OGM subtitles to work on WinXP? Hey Tab., here's a crazy thought, why don't you try deleting all those garbage beta test codecs you downloaded off your system and then just install the K-Lite codec pack, I think you'll find everything works a WHOLE lot better.
Like I said before, you might have a lot of knowledge about video, but when it comes to the sheer mechanics and workings of computer software, you don't know jack.
Free cl00, I'm running WinXP on two of my machines, Win98 on two others, and Linux on my last system, and I managed to get OGM files to work flawlessly on every one of them without any problems at all.
Aside from that, srt is the simplest and most lacking subtitle format in existence, ssa and picture subs are not supported.
Because we REALLY need the subtitles to have pictures, and hoo ha, and frilly lil pink-wait a minute...no we don't, they're just subtitles! o_O
Regular text subtitles with a simple shadow effect, no that's not good enough for some of the folks at Doom9, they gotta have images flashing around down there at the bottom of the screen! Maybe even an animated Pikachu! Yeah, that'd be kickass!
Now I'm sure that's great for some kid who just dled divx 5 and wants to impress his friends with wow, chapter points and simple text subs. But if you're gonna be running anamorphic vfr 24 alternating 30 fps content that's also got dropped frames for every duplicate using rv9 with the latest and greatest (ehq, twopass enhancements, high frequency efficiency, customized pattern adaptivity), with karaoke or picture subs and dual-language he-aac audio, and the DVD cover scans attached, ogm isn't going to cut it.
If you REALLY wanted/needed all that...why wouldn't you just use the DVD format? Hrmmm...didn't really think that one through too well, did ya? Here's an even better though, if you REALLY wanted all that in the first place...why wouldn't you just make a direct copy of the DVD itself? I suppose if you just ENJOYED making more work for yourself for the vain attempt at saving a whole 10mb of space by using XVid instead of MPEG...but uh...well HDs and blank CDs and DVDs are pretty damn cheap these days.
MKV has everything over ogm except acceptance, and ogm's acceptance only (very gradually) happened becuase until now there's been nothing else like (or better than) it.
And here's a free cl00 for ya, it works, and it works fine. So that means all those lil people out there are gonna reject it. I mean, hello, did we learn nothing from PAR vs PAR2? I mean, PAR2 actually DOES have some superior uses over PAR and yet look at how many people are just flat out rejecting it. And you think this new format, which doesn't really provide the average encoder with ANYTHING new that they could or would actually ever make use of is gonna magically knock it right off the mainstream market? *snicker*
D00d, seriously:
So MKV can do everything ogm can, great, but that's not really all that much anyway.
...and now he's starting to attack his own position... o_O
Internal subtitles, chapters, vorbis (and vbr audio in general), smaller overhead, more durable.
More durable! New great taste! A fresh new scent! *snicker* Are you advertising a file format or a new brand of dish soap?
Those are the only things ogm had over avi.
Um, weren't you just talking about the benefits of mkv over ogm?
MKV, on the other hand, can hold ANY video and audio codec in existence,
Why you can even encode in Intel's Indeo! Or how about that great Cinepack codec by Radius! Oh yeah, just think of the possibilities! And now, not only can you encode in MP3 and PCM, but think of how cool you'll look when you start encoding your audio with WMA!
as ridiculous as that sounds.
...and once again he's attacking his own position.
It supports all kinds of crazy things with timing (variable framerate, referencing frames from any point in the stream - possibilities for how that could be used with different kinds of temporal compression techniques are staggering).
Which would really be neato if the source footage actually supported all that shit to begin with. But uh, oh yeah if it doesn't, well shit, not gonna do any good. Seriously Tab, you sound like one of those people who thinks reencoding an MP3 from 128 to 192 is gonna magically make it sound better.
It's got linking and file attachment.
Now that I actually would like...but only because the malicious hacker in me can think of ALL sorts of nasti things I could do with it. `, )
It's got arbitrary height and width values, for any kind of resize-on-playback purpose you could dream up.
I can imagine playing video back on a 100x900 screen...but that doesn't mean I would ever actually want or need to. o_O
And that's all just from the initial release.
The next release will be able to wash your car and make coffee! Not only that but it'll come with a web browser built right in!
So saying that ogm does anything well, and that matroska or any other new format doesn't do it better,
The sad fact that keeps skipping you is that it DOESN'T NEED TO BE BETTER! I mean, they're subtitles fer keerist sake, it's a lil hard to screw up.
is a load of crap. Ogm works at a minimal level. The bigger stuff is for those who want/need more.
And the primarily problem with that is:
What source footage are you capturing from that has ANY of that crap included in the first place? Or did you just have a magic theory about improving quality and functionality that isn't even there in the first place?
Hey, this has become unusually constructive. How bout we keep it that way.
I don't see how any of this is constructive in the least bit. I mean your points are very few and far between and then when you do have a point it's like you just ignore all real world logic and understanding. Like I said before, you're like a guy whose read every piece of material there ever was on the game of basketball, but then you've never actually played.
Personally, if I were you, I would be careful about what you say in forums like this regarding video formats and compression. Cause one of these days yer gonna wind up creating the next PAR vs PAR2 riots. Which BTW are STILL going on in most of the major multi-part binary groups.
