
New MPEG 4-Based Open Source Codec 176
Jestyr writes: "Let me inform you about our new MPEG-4-based codec called 3IVX. You probably heard of DivX ;-) as a movie compression format. And indeed it's great.
But we (the whole 3ivx.com team... want to go a bit further. Our goal is to optimize compression so that the file size is smaller, of a higher quality and fully streamable. Moreover the codec will be supported on all platforms (Windows, Macintosh, BeOS, *nix (inlcuding Linux), Amiga ...). To accomplish this the code of the player will become an open source."" I'll believe it when its running on my desktop, but I'd love to see the world standardize on a high-quality video format that is open source. Damn Sorenson.
Pronounciation guide? (Score:2)
I have been looking at it and can't come up with anything that any normal sane person would say a few times a day.
program for ps2? (Score:1)
Re:Open source scam... don't think so (Score:4)
Re:Suggestion: Don't GPL the player (Score:2)
That is exactly what I was arguing (though had yet to reach the simple clarity you have no made me realise regarding the LGPL). I was not trying to suggest that the warfare was bad....I was saying it would be good. If something like this was GPL'd and then someone tried to fork the format into a GPL and non-GPL version, we could all enjoy the fight. If it was under a BSD style license and someone started an open and closed fork, it would be the rantings of Free Software campaigners (like me so don't say I'm flamebaiting) that would be calling for the end of the fork, and this would mean the fork would stay and that would be bad for everyone. MP3 is strong because (despite some IP idiots efforts) it is easy to get decoders and encoders and it is a format that provides something people want. No video format is strong yet because the IP idiots have control, once everyone has the opportunity to get a wide range of tools to play and create/edit in one format for all platforms, that format will be hard to shift unless its bitrate/quality is severly beaten to the benefit of the majority of users (and unfortunately windows alone can do that at the moment, but not for long).
Bottom line, if anyone here is working on any form of a video codec, please please please GPL it and start making your money from the work you can do around the codec and not from the language the codec entails.
Re:Just like DVDs? (Score:1)
It comes with bbMPEG (3rd party encoder) which can produce MPEG-1 (i.e. VCD) or MPEG-2 (i.e. DVD, SVCD) streams, but not MPEG-4.
It can also pipe to the Windows AVI system, where you can pick from any AVI codec you have installed (like DivX, or Indeo, or whatever).
No MPEG-4 support.
Re:What have you done?! (Score:1)
"you can't give away an MPEG4 encoder" (Score:2)
$100.00 (Score:2)
What, you don't think $100.00 is very much? Don't understimate the power of numbers. Put the total amount that you want to be paid individually, the amount you will need to spend in a type of "open budget", and let people come and contribute the money. I know tons of companies, even the one where I work, that would certainly donate cold hard cash to see an excellent, open MPEG4 implementation. Help usher in the dawn of collaborative production!
It's a pity the media player looks so awfull! (Score:1)
--
opencodex (Score:1)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:1)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:1)
--
Re:Open source scam... (Score:1)
That's what my PlayStation 2 is for.
A large number of pieces of hardware.
Like S/390 perhaps? Or how about Alpha? What about ia64? Didn't think so. Windows is behind the times.
A decent, stable office suite.
StarOffice works fine for me.
Fonts that don't look like complete ass.
Freetype has been out for years now.
Professional-quality graphics programs (Photoshop and Illustrator).
Hmm, you keep on defining these software packages as "necessary" -- but then you attach brand-names to them, which precludes any such product that isn't released for Linux. That's a self-fulfilling profecy, because by your definition Linux cannot have said products. Letting that aside, Linux has numerous commercial and free applications that perform the same functions. (Corel Draw and the Gimp, for example).
DVD players.
It's illegal to make an open-source DVD player; not much we can do when the law is against us... but if you want to claim that Windows is better because Microsoft has better lawyers (who are in bed with the MPAA), then go ahead and take the dubious prize.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
no it doesn't and no it's not (Score:1)
Also. 300K is equal to 2400k, which is the unit the original poster was measuring in. To get down to 750k, try a 100k movie.
Who is Sorenson? (Score:2)
Re:When I tried 3ivx... (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Nice compression! (Score:1)
Patents and Open Source (Score:2)
the one woe of open source... (Score:2)
A new codec is great, especially if new nifty features are created, with one exception, that being when multiple different codecs that are very similar in end behaviour are created. One can look at similar products both having an unusual effect on the market in terms of Gnome and KDE, neither of which is a bad product, both doing roughly the same thing, with slightly different ways to achieve the same result. Unfortunately, neither one blows the other out of the water, so I as a user have to keep different sets of stuff on my computer to ensure compatibility.
In this new codec, it sounds nice, but I'm curious as to what features, features that will actually matter, will seperate it from DivX. If there really aren't any then wouldn't it just make sense to approach the DivX people and see if they are interested in revising the codec? I remember when QuickTime and Intel's AVI fought it out, and at the time I was using them the Quicktime codec seemed to blow chunks compared to the AVI, but the AVI format wouldn't play cross-platform. now, we have MP3 format, which is nice, cross platform, pretty good compression, no watermarking capabilities, etc, with the only drawback being the whole royalties thing. Microsoft introduced their proprietary format, which from what I've seen is not taking off. The lesser of evils here is clear.
I don't see how DivX and this new one really have major differences, in the end, that will affect me, but I'm not an expert. What I do see getting ready to develop is two formats fighting to be 'dominant', and neither one winning, instead fragmenting the users similar to how KDE and Gnome, vi and Emacs, etc have, and making people coding universal players stock up on asprin. If people are willing to rally behind a standard that is 'good enough', without settling for crap and staying with something actually worthwhile, it's okay if it's not "bleeding edge", after all, most people aren't there anyway...
</rant>
"Titanic was 3hr and 17min long. They could have lost 3hr and 17min from that."
maybe you should read again (Score:3)
They say nothing about opening their codec, just the player. Moreover, they already have investors, IPO plans, and an NDA. They arent going to release their necoder if their investors are worried about a guaranteed profit angle.
Pretty much more of the same. Even if it works its not anything Free enough to displace WMP. Nothing to see here, move along everyone...
Re:Pronounciation guide? (Score:2)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:3)
Suggestion: Don't GPL the player (Score:3)
Good luck! Sounds like a nice toy! maybe we can get rid of Quicktime or RAM's..
...I had a dream!
- Xabbu
Re:Open source scam... (Score:1)
opencodex (Score:1)
Unfortunately I have to finish the really nasty part of the contest: the quicktime component. Quicktime is really a nightmare to program. The benefit is that after this component is done, all quicktime movies (sorenson,...) can be converted to the opencodex format.
Anyone interested in the libh263 source code (LPGL) can contact me (david.janssens@pandora.be). Full source should be publicly available when contest is over (ie: qt component is ready).
patents everywhere (Score:2)
Re:the one woe of open source... (Score:1)
What a lame statement... (Score:2)
Yeah right. You just have to be running Windows, which means you already have paid ridiculous amounts of money!
Re:Who is Sorenson? (Score:2)
Yeah (Score:1)
Microsoft Optical Intellimouse (Score:1)
Optical Intellimouse uses technology from HP.
Re:Open source scam... don't think so (Score:1)
Decisions, decisions... (Score:2)
If I create a great codec and sell it, I make money but Slashdot wants to condemn me to Hell. If I create a great codec and give it away I'm dirt poor but Slashdot wants to send me to Heaven.
I wonder what St. Peter thinks of all this.
Me personally, I seem to recall that at the beginning of all this, there was a certain other famous guy who's name also began with an S, and wanted to send people to Hell.
"Come", he said "eat of the CVS tree, and in the day that you eat therof, you will become an Open Source God". So the coders did eat, and their eyes were opened, and they received stock options...
Interesting (Score:4)
We need to get rid of patents! (Score:1)
Re:When I tried 3ivx... (Score:2)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:1)
Re:MPEG-4 (Score:2)
A zillion companies have announced that they will be supporting it; the latest set is the Internet Streaming Media Alliance [ism-alliance.org].
mirror here... (Score:2)
(as reported on the website itself, which won't do much good when it goes down)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:3)
Close but no cigar. The mouse is actually using HP patents, not Microsoft. The only thing I've seen come from MS is a talking paperclip in a word processor.
But What about Toms Hardware (Score:3)
Re:Open source scam... (Score:1)
Mind to show me the list?
Cross Platform Re:Interesting (Score:1)
As stated earlier, XMPS [sourceforge.net] also plays mpeg4. There's even an xmms plugin (uses libiaries from avifile and SDL)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
It does DivX. The player is open source, you can build it yourself. It works in linux/freebsd. What it does is it reads
Download the source and the binaries.zip. Extract the zipfile and stick it in
It even plays FRICKEN ASFS and SMR codecs. =]
The codecs themselves DO NOT use open source dlls though, so it's up to you weather you like this or not, but it's fine, especially with playing ASFs and DivX.
Re:Open source scam... (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Heh, I believe you are talking about the same people who created 3ivX, and the source of this whole discussion. They started off reverse engineering DivX to make it work with Quicktime on the MacOS, but decided just to create a new, cross-platform protocol based on all the reverse-engineering work they had done.
Enlighten Us (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
Unfortunately, it seems to be down right now. I'm betting it's hosted on the same server as 3ivx, and has been
they can implement their own (Score:1)
Re:Pronounciation guide? (Score:1)
Expect to see a few more like this [e3vi.com] over the next couple of years.
Re:Open source scam... (Score:2)
I've considered a PS2 but I still will keep my Windows partition for the type of gaming I do. A PS2 doesn't do very good on UT/Q3/Etc. mods or custom maps for the strategy games I like to play.
I can do without winanything(winmodems, winprinter, etc.). Windows can keep those pieces of hardware.
StarOffice works fine for me too but it is a more resource hungry than I would like. I can see why people with less than top-of-line computers complain about it and I'm not a fan of the integrated desktop. Hopefully the open version will get leaner.
Freetype doesn't fix everything but helps a lot.
We will have to see if Intervideo [intervideo.com] will actually release LinDVD. They look like they might be closer but they have been taking a lot longer than people want to wait. They better have been chipset support than there current list because I don't have any of those video cards.
About 3ivx and MPEG4 (Score:1)
3ivx uses QuickTime because it's cross-platform and it's the official MPEG4 packaging format.
3ivx isn't truely MPEG4 yet -- that's a longterm goal. Of course, DivX
It's just an early preview release so far. Obviously 3ivx needs major performance improvements, not to mention a sound layer, before it will be able to compete. But the developers seem confident they will get there.
DivX
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
only because there is a wrapper around the Win32 codec.
Windows media codecs are DLLs that all implement the same set of compression / decompression calls, per se. Once the codec wrapper is written, you can substitute the codec of your choice. Reading a Sorenson stream is no different than reading a DivX stream, or a MS MPEG-4 stream. Please see http://divx.euro.ru for the tool, called avifile, that drives pretty much every decoder/encoder for Linux. It uses the native Win32 DLLs to provide all of the real functionality.
Re:Open Source, I don't think so (Score:2)
I really doubt the claim that the Heroine MPEG-2 CODEC has been optimized to the point where it can achieve the same quality as Microsoft's MPEG-4 (i.e. DivX) at the same bitrate. I havn't checked out the exact same clip compressed both ways, but I've played the xmovie samples and a bunch of DivX's, and it seems that for the same quality DivX's are way smaller...
This is not open source (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:3)
All the players that will play DivX will also play Windows Media 7 MPEG4 as a result. Sorensen too, CmdrTaco.
There are even compression tools for all of the Windows formats, courtesy of avifile as well..
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
However, the only confirmed way to watch DivX encoded videos (to my knowledge) is through any number of windows applications that are using the DivX ;-) codec. This codec is simply a binary hack of a stolen alpha-release of Microsoft's MPEG4 codec.
Just like DVDs? (Score:3)
Which way would you rather have it? A Winblows only, proprietary, guarded by 6 million attack dog lawyers format, or a format where the open source community already has half of the equation?
Yeah, it would be nice to have it both ways, but lets not get pissed off when stuff is handed to us!
---
Re:Suggestion: Don't GPL the player (Score:2)
I actually came into this story primarily to post the exact opposite sentiment! Now that I have read more I actually couldn't care about this 3ivx as it reads to me as a half-arsed scam (they will give an open source player and that's it!). I will still explain why I would hate to see something like this released under a license other than the GPL.
Imagine a codec was released under a BSD style licensce, the most likely outcome would be for MS and Sorenson to pick it up if it has any worthwhile qualities and then to hack their IP into it or it into their IP and then release this as a binary. Now at this point we have just lost cross-platform compatibility and the battle will return to the battle of the commercials.
Imagine it is GPL, no company is going to pick it up unless it is better than their own product, in which case they will pick it up and figure out how to release software with it/to use it and still make money. The take-up may be incredibly slowed, but at least if their is a take up it will be of the same codec that everyone is using, and not a closed hack on it which creates the same mess as we have had up to now.
This will get modded as flamebait, but do you work for aplle, sorenson, real or MS? If not WTF are you thinking?
Re:About 3ivx and MPEG4 (Score:3)
How do you know this? Do you have some sort of information that we don't?
2. DivX
The legality of DivX
In any case, I think it is down to 3ivx and projectmayo. Let the best codec win.
-Davidu
Re:Open source scam... (Score:2)
Read my lips.....BULLSHIT
You must be are American and hence subjected to the most absurd legal system in the world (and to those who deny this I quote your Presidential Election AND Todays' lovely cryptography/seizure addition to the Medal of Honor bill....I don't need to mention teenage Swedes do I). I am Eurpoean and hence can happily write a DVD player, GPL it and then stick it onto any distribution system I want that is not corrupted by US law
projects that really are free (Score:4)
Xiphophorus [xiph.org]
and
Fiasco! [linuxave.net]
Not quite there yet (Score:5)
First of all, it requires QuickTime. Not only that, but the player really isn't anything but a quicktime plugin. That right there is enough of a problem to make me shy of it.
Ok, now. Another problem is this. The encoder isn't even released yet (that I know of??). What good is the player if there isn't an encoder. Until this is released what good does it do us except let us "ooh" and "ahh" about what it could become.
Performance: All I've heard about 3ivx is how poor the performance is, unless you've got a P-III with about an 800mhz CPU. So much for all of us who aren't making 75 grand a year and have to stick with the same computer for a little while.
Look what else is out there: Right now the standard is Divx
My conclusion: It has potential, but it's gonna take some kicking and screaming to make everybody happy with this one...Good luck!
(the comments contained in this posting are simply my own opinions)
Open Source, I don't think so (Score:5)
1. What we want is a REAL open source codec. We don't want an open source player, API, or "framework" -- we want a true MPEG-4 open source codec.
2. The 3ivx website has released a closed source codec that integrates into quicktime but from what they have released so far, it doesn't compete with Windows Media Format or Sorenson AT ALL. I sure hope that they will release something of decent quality soon.
3. Of all the groups working on a nice MPEG-4 codec, we have seen many die, fizzle, or simply lie. OpenCodex.com [opencodex.com] is pretty much off the face of the planet and now their website is just some virtual hosting site. 3ivx [3ivx.com] has said they have a supperior product, and that it will be open source, so far both have been false. That leaves it to ProjectMayo [projectmayo.com] -- the group started by the creator of DivX. They haven't released anything yet but they sure seem to be the most professional. Perhaps we can appeal to them to become open source.
No matter what happens, the community is ready for a REAL MPEG-4 codec that does not just have some open player, it needs to be fully open so that it can be ported to all OS's, optimized, and hacked to be even better than a small group of developers could imagine.
just my $.02,
-Davidu
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:2)
One problem thatstill needs to be addressed is real time encoding. If content providers want to utilise the technology they'll want to be able to do this to live feeds such as newscasts and sports coverages which I suspect is not feasible yet or at least not at bitrates MS are quoting. Having said that the codec is very impressive regradless. MS is flexing their muscle again and only stupid or ignorant people (such as slashdot editors) would neglect such advancements.
Way to go slashdot. you guys rock.
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:3)
Microsoft spends something like four billion dollars [zdnet.com] a year on research. Until now, the only useful thing I've really seen come out of that research was the Optical Intellimouse.
But I have to say that I've just tried the WM8 stuff, and it's pretty good. Actually, it's better than that--it's scary good. The audio compression blows away RealAudio, and although I've only listened to the few samples available, seems to be able to rival mp3 quality with a much better compression ratio. The video is pretty good (although I think that 'DVD quality' is a stretch--I easily noticed artifacts that I wouldn't tolerate on a DVD.)
When I tried 3ivx... (Score:2)
Some facts and sense (Score:4)
- 3ivX is/will be a codec for encoding audio and video, based on MPEG-4. Hopefully it will be better than most other MPEG-4 codecs out there, the player, at least, will be open source.
- it is still VERY much in development! all the stuff out there on 3ivx.com is *test*. it is certainly not ready for public scrutiny or evaluation. Why this got posted to
- to quote from their site:
As explained in the previous report, we would like to remind you that the code contains absolutely no optimization. Nothing is assumed about the hardware - and this is to facilitate the ports to other platforms.
- In terms of multiplatformability, 3ivx runs under Quicktime, but also runs under XAnim. So now you know.
- One of the performance targets of 3ivx is to get fast encoding, as well as decoding. So far, it has encoded up to almost 3 times as fast as the Sorenson encoder. And this is still in development, with no optimisations.
- i dont know what planet people are on who are saying the codec is poor quality. Screenshots on the 3ivx site show it positively kicking Sorenson's ass at the same bitrates.
- the support page lists all sorts of other technology bits going into 3ivx, so check it out.
So there you have it. It's a free, multiplatform open source and hopefully high quality audio/video codec. It looks to be good, especially if it can be better than Div X
Though given everyone whining about the lack of a good codec for Linux for the past year or two, I'm surprised why everyone has suddenly attacked it without doing some research beyond reading the first line of the article. Get involved.
Fross
Re:Patents and Open Source (Score:2)
As a matter of fact, all patents are available publicly and one of the criteria for a patent is that you must describe the invention clearly enough so that a person "ordinarily skilled" in the art can replicate the patented technology.
Even if a company were to cut and paste the code from an open source project into a closed-source commercial product that would not effect, in any way, the enforceability of the patent.
The rub comes in where companies want to keep thing a "trade secret". There is no time limit on trade secrets and the must be kept secret, and don't prohibit someone from independently inventing the same thing.
Trade secrets and open source don't mix but patents and open source can coexist.
As and aside, most of the patent licensing revenues are derived from deals between companies not from end users. End users pay for a product, which is generally more than just a collection of patents.
Whether patents are a good or evil is a completely different subject.
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:2)
Re:maybe you should read again (Score:4)
Re:Explain the patent/license issues for MPEG-4/3i (Score:2)
MPEG-4 is a standard for compression of movies, much in the same way MPEG-2 is used for DVD and MPEG-1 was used for VideoCD. It supports less resolutions, but a much lower bitrate and is a much more lossy format. It was designed for video streaming.
DivX is a binary hack of an unreleased Microsoft 'MPEG-4' codec. I have that in quotes because it isn't exactly MPEG-4; Hard to conform to a standard that doesn't really exist, so they made a bit of it up as they went. There are other hack codecs, such as the Angelpotion codec, as well.
Microsoft has since released a 'MPEG-4' version (Again, quotes) from the same heritage as the DivX codec, but with additional tweaks, mainly to make it stream better. A newer, better version is expected to be released with Media Player 8.
Well, at least that's how I understand it, but I may be wrong.
Re:Interesting (Score:4)
There are very few problems with DivX support in linux. The windows dll method works quite nicely, and performance is just fine on my system.
Also, DivX *has* been successfully reverse-engineered. A few weeks (months?) ago, it was ported to Macintosh by a group without access to the source. It's not a particularly difficult task, since the method used by the codec is very simple.
In any case, if you check the XMPS website (at least last time I checked) you can even see a screenshot of the software playing the trailer from "The Matrix". Unconfirmed? Sheeeeeeesh.
Regards,
gleam
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Just like DVDs? (Score:2)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
There is no open source DivX ;-) codec. It was stolen from Microsoft in the alpha stage and remains a second-rate codec, due to this. The newer versions of Microsoft's MPEG4 scheme are *much* better. After all, why wouldn't MS use their own codec, if DivX ;-) was really so good? I have tested each of these various MPEG4s and am quite satisfied that Microsoft's Windows Media Encoder does the best job of compression relative to loss in quality. And I've heard even better things about their upcoming version of Windows Media.
Open source scam... (Score:5)
This company just wants unpaid help to port their player around in the hopes of gaining market share...
Finally, cross-platform filth! (Score:2)
Midwatch Industries
DivX != DVIX (Score:2)
"Titanic was 3hr and 17min long. They could have lost 3hr and 17min from that."
Re:Suggestion: Don't GPL the player (Score:2)
I have no interest in making MS users suffer, but the fact is that everyone would suffer because cross compatibility would be gone, you would be back to two (or more) implementations and only one would be able to play a given stream. If it was GPL'd however, if someone tried to make an incompatible version they would be faced with warfare from all the platforms they didn't support (let alone the effort required to make sure you didn't let any GPL code into the re-engineered version). Would apple and sorenson and MS and real all create their own incompatible imlementations or would they just say "fuck it" and write thier higher level aps so that they can use the codec?
Oxford explains it (Score:5)
First, there is only a 3ivx decoder which in fact
is a Quicktime 4 plugin. The de-facto standard
these days is a AVI-encoding enabled (i.e.patched)
version of Microsoft's MPEG4 V3 DirectShow filter
and that DS code alone is worth three months of
writing and debugging. But then, to make a codec
you need an encoder as well and this is also still
missing. But that is not the most difficult part.
Microsoft has spent a huge amount of work on
improvements for the original, specified MPEG4V1
written-down-on-paper standard for film encoding.
Which means they already have quite an edge
because if you look at the output of their V1 and
their V3 codecs, you will notice how much better
V3 deals with low (800-- kbit/s) bitrates. These
movies of course are ~512 Pixels (and up) in X
resolution, for 1.85:1 you see 224 pixels in Y
direction, pirated movies have around ~640x288
pixels in case you never seen one. Compare that
to the unplayable 12.5 fps stamp-sized demos on
3ivx' webpage, there's a difference isn't it.
As for Windows Media Encoder 8, while their AAC
implementation now cuts off at 16khz and still
stinks at anything above 64kbit/s compared to
MP3@128 (wme7 cuts off at 20 but lacks sound
transparency just like wme8), the new WME8
codec is now slightly better than DiVX
The visible-macroblock plague from V3 is very
well hidden now without smearing the picture,
which is quite a stunt at 500 kbit.
Thinking three years ahead, if you should be able
to once buy&download movies in MPEG4, you can
certain that MS will be supplying the codec,
because (once again) piracy has bought MS a huge
marketshare. Some russian chap even ported the
codec to Linux by emulating DirectShow DLL calls
(ouch). Combine this with a P3-Nvidia-5.1-Dolby
Digital-whizzbang X-Box and you can get a glimpse
what your kids may want for x-mas 2002 B).
Merry Christmas
from Germany.
Re:Open source scam... (Score:4)
There are probably others, as well, but that's all I can think of right now. And for each item on that list there is limited support under Linux. For example, I won't deny that KOffice has serious potential... If it didn't crash every two minutes. I'm sorry, but I'm sticking with Win2k. It's at least as stable as Linux and, unlike Linux, the applications are there.
Re:Not Sorensen's Fault (Score:2)
There are no "DivX ;-)" codecs... (Score:2)
DivX ;-) Deux (Score:3)
Doesn't look like it's going to be open source, but it could definitely cause some troubles for 3ivx if it competes.
You can't be sure ANYTHING is patent free (Score:4)
The way patents work, you can't be sure that any project is free of patents. Unfortunately, most of the people starting these "patent free" projects think that patents are like copyrights and trade secrets -- if you don't copy, you're alright. Patents don't work that way.
A safe rule of thumb would be to assume that anything is likely covered by an issued or pending patent filed by someone -- hopefull it is someone who isn't a vulture. Even when standards organizations make their members agree to license their patents on reasonable terms, they have no control over the companies who are not members. The number of software patents are growing so quickly you can never be sure a particular concept is not patented (even if you could look through all of the hundreds of thousands of issued software patents, you have no insight at all into the hundreds of thousands that have been in the application phase for a few years and are almost ready to issue).
It is an unfortunate state of affairs, but no one can claim to know that a paticular project is patent-free.
-Steve
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:2)
While the artifiacts are clearly visible it's still excellent. Nevertheless, that 750k stream is the best looking stream of realtime video I've ever seen over my 1.5mbps cablemodem, and that includes some 1mpbs MP7 streams. They must have used a very high quality source for that sample.
The audio is excellent too.
Nice compression! (Score:3)
But it would be really good if they could use some open and unencumbered standards. DIVX;-) was really cheap, just ripping off Microsoft's binaries and putting some cracks on them. I don't think they could have made a truly free implementation because of all the patents involved, so I think it's time to move beyond MPEG4 and get a totally new and free standard, like Ogg Vorbis is doing.
Its roman numeral encoded leet speak (Score:3)
3ivx = 3-iv-x = 3-4-10 = ealo
Sorry for the lowercase roman numerals, bloody lameness filter rejected it with all uppercase :P
Re:Open source scam... (Score:2)
Well, no matter where you are you can always (if you are willing) take the approach seen in the great McDonalds case where the authors of a McD critical leaflet spent a few years in court costing McD's a huge amount of legal fees while they didn't pay a penny in legal fees AND (far more importantly) were all worthless (no assets) so that McD's could never recoup the money.
Bottom line, look what happened in Sweden regarding DeCSS. It is the U.S. that causes all the problems so I will say it again.....Should all coders be in Europe? [slashdot.org]
MPEG4 mired in patents (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:2)
I'd be interested in some real studies comparing the Sorensen codec to the MPEG4 codec.
Re:Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:2)
Re:the one woe of open source... (Score:2)
3ivX is standards-compliant; DivX is not.
3ivX might become open source; DivX will never be.
wouldn't it just make sense to approach the DivX people and see if they are interested in revising the codec?
The DivX people don't even have the source to DivX; how are they supposed to revise it?
Mediaplayer8 codec demos (Score:5)
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/e
If you have a high bandwidth connection the 750k stream looks quite impressive. Almost DVD quality. The audio demo is quite good as well, sounding much better than mp3 encoding at the same data rate.
There's a beta version of the encoder available from MS if anyone wants to fool around with it.
Explain the patent/license issues for MPEG-4/3ivX (Score:3)
For example, I heard DivX was adapted from some leaked Microsoft source code. Does that mean that DivX is not fully free? I'm sure M$ didn't GPL that code.. so what's up with that?
Similarly, is the MPEG-4 codec itself free? Is it like MP3 where some institute somewhere owns it? I know it's been in development for a long time, so are there relevent patents involved?
And now 3ivX....apparently also a derivitave of someone else's work (MPEG-4)... How "legit" is the whole thing in terms of free-as-in-speech-ness? Will 3ivX-in-hardware players conceivably be legally available someday Can anyone use the 3ivX standards without paying a royalty?
Sorry, just kinda confused. I appreciate the technological acheivements here, but I'm curious about the licensing/other issues.
W
-------------------
another mirror... (Score:4)
--