Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Good News On Two Open-Codec Fronts 187

Posted by timothy from the well-whaddya-know dept.
davidu writes: "The Fraunhofer Institute in Germany (makers of the mp3 codec) licensed the divx ;-) video codec for future use. This is good for users because the codec is open source and is now on its way to becoming a standard. For those who don't know, this is unrelated to the failed Circuit City program, hence the smiley. ;-)" On the audio side of things, Mike Hicks writes: "Saw this on LWN's Daily Updates. Kenwood has come up with a car audio playing system that understands the Ogg Vorbis compression format, the Music Keg. Me want.. Time to start digging for spare change in the couch ..." Update: 02/05 03:24 GMT by T : Two clarifications below put a slight damper on each of these, though the overall news is still good.

Vince Busam from Phatnoise writes: "The author of the mp3newswire article goofed big time! Nowhere does it state that the Keg plays Ogg files, only the desktop software. Ogg will be supported when free ARM libraries are available. The author is further incorrect when he mentions the Kenwood X959 plays MPEG video files on the tiny OLE display. I have no idea where he got that idea." And reader Guspaz points out: "OpenDivX is indeed opensourced, but it is not the same as DivX 4, which was what was liscenced (And is what people download to use)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Good News On Two Open-Codec Fronts More

Good News On Two Open-Codec Fronts

Comments Filter:

  • DivX Open Source? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by calle42 ( 90619 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:23PM (#2953357)
    I guess this is as good a time as ever to ask: What was that screw-up concerning the openness of DivX4? All I seem to know at the moment is that they apparently were open at the beginning and then closed their stuff, basically screwing over all the contributors up to that point. Can anybody shine some light on this and tell whether that really happened?

    • Re:DivX Open Source? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by CheezyD ( 548557 )
      I don't know about Divx, but a few years back Frauhoffer released the specs to the mp3 codec, then when it became popular they start saying everyone that uses it (including all the freeware and GPL encoders) has to pay them royalties. I wouldn't trust them as far as I can throw a '74 Buick.

    • Re:DivX Open Source? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Divx4.x != Open source, where (X > 0).

      You are correct- the newest sourceson proectmayo are 8-12 months old, and several revisions behind what the current state of development.

      Divx4 is genereally regarded as a lesser-among-equals among the high-quality MPEG4-alikes. Better than VP3 and WM8, but slightly more blurry than properly done SBC Divx3.11 (Using a program like Nandub or Gordian Knot), in addition to the licensing issues with divx4 (and a lot anger over the code-hijack that divxnetworks, inc. pulled). There's a few new codecs in development that are very promising, but not quite ready for prime-time.

      • Re:DivX Open Source? (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Guspaz ( 556486 )
        I disagree with you. A poorly done DivX 4.12 encode might be blurrier than a properly done SBC DivX 3.11, but a properly done DivX 4.12 encode is quite a bit better than a properly done SBC DivX 3.11 encode. DivX 4.12 produces higher quality encodes at lower bitrates, has better post-processing, is more immune to audio de-syncing, and finally has two-pass encoding. I will admit though that there are some isolated instances where 3.11 is usefull, but these are becoming fewer and fewer as DivX 4 progresses. Regards, Guspaz.
    • DivX is completely closed source now. Project Mayo is all but dead, the speed and quality of its encode aren't anywhere near that of DivX 4.11. Oh well. Other projects have branched off of Project Mayo, like XVid (xvid.org), that are doing pretty well, still pretty beta. Checkout Doom9.org for some more updated info
    • I was under the impression that to change the license, say, from an open to closed, that they would have to have permission of all contributors up to that point or throw their work out... if this is so, I don't see how they all got screwed... they might have gone along with it.
      • You're SUPPOSED to ask everyone's concent. In practicality you don't have to- the only way for a contributer can keep you from closing the code is by suing you. They didn't ask, so people are pissed off.
  • How does the DivX [divx.com] compare to the first Ogg Tarkin [xiph.org] ideas?
    • How does the DivX [divx.com] compare to the first Ogg Tarkin [xiph.org] ideas?
      I mean both in license terms and technical aspects.
    • Tarkin is nowhere near complete and is not very usable yet.
      • Tarkin is nowhere near complete and is not very usable yet.
        I know, I mean the first ideas.

      • Re:DivX vs Ogg Tarkin (Score:5, Informative)

        by hexix ( 9514 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @11:11PM (#2953485) Homepage
        Tarkin is nowhere near complete and is not very usable yet.

        I have no clue where Tarkin is at but this was posted to Gnome's desktop-devel list today:

        Subject: Cool news of the Day
        From: Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller

        Hi dudes,
        I just wanted to let you all know that as of yesterday GStreamer has
        support for encoding and decoding of Ogg Tarkin video. So now you can
        convert all your DivX movies to Ogg Tarkin with the help of GStreamer.

        I also think that makes the GStreamer mediaplayer the first mediaplayer
        to support Ogg Tarkin :)

        Christian

        • Re:DivX vs Ogg Tarkin (Score:4, Informative)

          by Omega Hacker ( 6676 ) <omega@omega[ ]net ['cs.' in gap]> on Tuesday February 05, 2002 @12:31AM (#2953657)
          As a lead GStreamer developer, and someone very interested in Tarkin, I must point out that what was added was a plugin to "w3d", a candidate technology for Tarkin. There is no Tarkin codec, yet, and won't be for some time, as there is still heavy research into what the best type of codec is for this task. w3d is just one of many attempts to make something workable, albeit the most successful so far. Unfortunately, my hint that the plugin should be called "w3d" was ignored ;-(
  • The page doesn't say much about the hard drive "cartridge" other then that it is 10GB and removable.
    Can this be hacked, a 100Gig drive with uncompressed wavs for ultimate in quality.

  • The MusicKeg does not play Ogg Vorbis at this time (Score:5, Informative)

    by calle42 ( 90619 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:29PM (#2953372)
    The Music Keg is based on the PhatBox [phatnoise.com] car audio system, and neither supports OggVorbis in the car at this time. Only the accompanying Windows software lets you encode CDs into .ogg, nothing more. There's still hope though, here's a quote from the Vorbis mailing list from Vince Busam, who seems to be one of the developers of the PhatBox:
    The PhatBox (and Music Keg) will support Ogg as soon as FREE libraries are available which will run on the ARM 7. If anybody is working towareds such a goal, please let me know. I can test it out on the PhatBox, and incorporate it into future upgrades.

  • Here is what I need to know... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Tom7 ( 102298 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:30PM (#2953374) Homepage Journal
    I thought DivX ;-) was just a repackaged version of Microsoft's MPEG-4 codec. ("Version 3")

    I seem to recall that some folks were writing a new codec and using that name (presumably to get free publicity, I mean, who will sue them?), and also making it open-source. ("Version 4")

    So why does Fraunhofer need to license this new codec if it's open source? And why is it "patent pending"??

    • Can we PLEASE put this one to rest? (Score:4, Informative)

      by wunderhorn1 ( 114559 ) on Tuesday February 05, 2002 @12:10AM (#2953602)
      RTFM [divx.com] !


      Q: Is the OpenDivX(TM) codec the same as the DivX(TM) codec?

      A: Yes and no. Yes, they are both versions of DivX compression technology. The OpenDivX codec was launched as an open-source project on Project Mayo in January 2001. Today, the project continues as a collaborative, educational development effort, focusing more on improving visual quality than optimizing performance. The latest generation of the DivX codec (version 4.x) was released in July 2001. The new DivX codec is technically completely different from OpenDivX, and is built from a different codebase. It has been optimized for greater performance and visual quality and has more features than OpenDivX. It's important to note that the two codecs produce compatible formats, meaning content encoded with OpenDivX can be played back with DivX, and vice versa. The DivX codec will from now on be the version with the most new features and widest compatibility across platforms, so this is the version we recommend you use.


      Q: Is DivX(TM) video technology a hack of Microsoft code?

      A: Absolutely not. A lot of people seem to think we're not making ourselves clear here, so pay attention: the DivX(TM) codec is a patent-pending (as in, patents owned by DivXNetworks) technology created from scratch (as in blank screen, blinking cursor) by DARC (the DivX Advanced Research Center) and the team at DivXNetworks. We hope this puts that issue to rest.

      • Re:Can we PLEASE put this one to rest? (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Read Tom7's post again. The FAQ refers to the Divx 4 codec, and the OpenDivX project (which as far as I can tell is dead, replaced by XVid.)

        Divx 3.11 :-) (note smiley) is certainly based on MS code. Quoth the readme:

        DivX ;-) MPEG4 DVD Video Codec
        3d release - http://divx.ctw.cc
        ---------------
        Based on M$ MPEG4 Hacked By Gej

        [...]
        This is a Hack of selected version of the M$ MPEG4 codec
        FOURCC and CLSid code have been hacked so you can make ALWAYS WORKING AVIs
        it can coexist with retail version of the media encoder tools
        and newers or hacked version of M$ MPEG4 codec.

        The basic problem is that DivXNetworks stole the name of the very popular hacked codec, bought the domainname, went legit with an entirely different codec, and then put up a FAQ which basically denies the existence of the codec who's name they stole. Seem a little scummy to you?
      • This doesn't answer my question at all.

        First, is "DivX ;-)" Version 3 really just microsoft's codec with the fourcc changed? That's the one that started all of this, not the various groups that took the name for their own projects.

        Second, is it or is it not open source, and if it is, why is it patent pending?
        • The hacked Divx version you're talking about has nothing to do with this article. It is a completely different animal released a while back by a different group. It ain't open source because it's owned by Microsoft. And if the current Divx project took their name from a bunch of hackers I couldn't care less.

          Anyway, now that we're talking about the same codec (the legit one that was written from scratch), the FAQ says what's OSS and what's not. Also do a little bit of research on the difference between Open Source and Free Software.


          • I already know what the differences between "Open Source" and "Free Software" are. What made you think I didn't?

            Jeesh. If you're going to be rude and act like you're inconvenienced by answering my question, just don't answer it.

        • The story of divx. (Score:5, Interesting)

          by kesuki ( 321456 ) on Tuesday February 05, 2002 @01:01AM (#2953761) Journal
          College kid gets into WMV Scene, starts hacking Releases 'DivX ;-)' which is two seperate version of WMV the older one 'Slow motion' and the newer one 'fast motion' and removes some other things M$ put in WMV to make it not good for High res movies.
          College kid gets a lot of press, and gets sued out of existance. Domain host sells domain to a 'smarter' college kid who starts ProjectMayo and levereges all the hype to start 'OpenDivX.' Since he's not a coder, he goes out and takes an open source MPEG-4 implementation and credits it's author as per the licence agreement but violates the licence agreement in that he releases it under the "OpenDivx License" which allows him to Close Source it once people on the internet have made changes to improve it.
          In the meantime he's found venture capital and even gotten good press, now he can hire programmers. He uses the "OpenDivx" license to make "DivX" a closed source Patent Pending Mpeg-4 implementation. To avoid legal problems he claims this was written from scratch -- but noone can prove that because it's closed source. This play was invented by Microsoft when they bought QDOS and used it to 'write from scratch' DOS 1.0. So the kid isn't stupid--at least he's learned from the best.
          Kid needs more funding finds a friend in the creators of the mp3 codec.

          The only thing I'm not 100% sure about is that the kid who got sued for DivX ;-) is really different from the one who started project Mayo. I don't see how they could be the same person though, Microsoft has more Sharks than Seaworld.
  • $700 for that player? What about a nice cheap (~$300) CD based player? That's why I still use mp3s, because my car stereo play mp3 CDs.

    • the whole thing w/ the phatbox is it works with your existing head unit (if it's on the compatibility list). so it just looks like a standard multichanger to the head unit. except of course, you have 10-30gbs of music on hand, with no swapping discs. actually, just look at this page [phatnoise.com] for an explanation.

      if you've got a single-disc loader up front, then you get the best of both worlds. and i know some folks have tried (successfully?) to keep a cd-changer in the loop too.

      i actually think it's pretty bad-ass. yes, it's pricey, but bad-ass. and mp3, wav, and (soon) flac support =)

  • Music Keg DOES NOT (yet) support OGG! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Vince ( 4999 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:30PM (#2953378) Homepage
    Nowhere does the Kenwood Music Keg (PhatNoise PhatBox) claim to support Ogg. The author of the article must have mis-read some of the literature which clearly states that Ogg is only supported in the (Windows) desktop software. The author also overstates the capabilities of the Kenwood X959, which does NOT play mpeg files, just short animations which can be loaded into the head unit's memory via CD-Rs.

    The Kenwood Music Keg runs Linux, and can be upgraded to support Ogg when free ARM decoding libraries are available. Also, there are Linux utilities for managing playlists on the Music Keg.
  • it does NOT play OGG. only the desktop software component of it supports playback and encoding of ogg files. the music keg currently only plays mp3, wma, and wav.

    of course, this is a product of these guys [phatnoise.com] and has been available for a while (and it does run linux!).

  • Pros/Cons (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ZaBu911 ( 520503 )
    DivX ;)
    -------
    Pros:
    - open source
    - videos can compress (send video footage to relatives over email, read the napsterization of TV post comments to see what I mean)

    Cons:
    - piracy of movies over net is encouraged, etc.
    - being licensed by a big corporation might lead them to become anal on us.. ie, charging fees?

    Ogg Vorbis

    Pros: Good quality/compression
    Cons: Not a standard

    just IMHO, and ramblins.
    • - open source
      (...)
      - being licensed by a big corporation might lead them to become anal on us.. ie, charging fees?
      Than what exactly do you mean by open source? Can it be used in free software [gnu.org] or not? (that's why I don't like the term open source...)
      • The company can change the future version to another license, but all GPL versions must remain GPL. It's happened before, I can't remember the project that it was callled.. But I belive Tux Racer also did the same thing, there is now a GPL and non-GPL version.

      • you seem to be confusing open-source with copy-lefted.

        Open-source simply means that they make the source code publicly available. (i.e. no non-disclosure agreements). Open source doesn't imply any restrictions such as requiring that people all derived code is also open source, nor does it imply any lack of restriction. Meaning I can make something open-source and then forbid you to use the code or derive anything from it. (Though that would be pretty stupid as I couldn't really enforce it).

        Copy-lefted is what linux is distributed under.

        • you seem to be confusing open-source with copy-lefted.
          No. When I see that something is "open source" but "being licensed by a big corporation might lead them to become anal on us.. ie, charging fees?" I just ask if it can be used in free software [gnu.org], i.e. software under GPL, LGPL, X11, BSD, Apache, W3C, MPL, Artictic, PHP, Python or whatever free software license, not only under a Copyleft [gnu.org] license. That's why I prefer the term free software [gnu.org], not open source [opensource.org], because it's clear what can be done with the software in the sense of freedom.

          But thanks for explaining, anyway. :)

    • - They both have stupid names.
    • being licensed by a big corporation might lead them to become anal on us.. ie, charging fees?

      Or in the name of proctecting someone's valuable content from villainous pirates (or any filth who actually believes in fair use) some company (like Microsoft) sells out big time, and even creates a fee structure for everyone, like some damn tariff. (See: Windows Media Player)

    • It was once open source, but Project Mayo killed it and turned it into closed source.
      So DivX4 is not OpenDivX.
    • Ogg Vorbis

      Pros: Good quality/compression
      Cons: Not a standard

      Well, as someone else posted, not a de facto standard, anyway.

      What I've been wondering is if the Ogg file format might get more use if someone implemented a readily available multiplexor/demultiplexor to allow video into it. I understand the Ogg Tarkin project is supposed to be the Free video codec for Ogg, but Tarkin is still some way off - at the moment, they're discussing whether or not to use Quicktime as the development framework for Tarkin, so even an alpha version of an Ogg Tarkin/Vorbis video format seems quite some time away yet. When I mentioned this question in a previous thread, someone mentioned a Window-only "DirectShow" project of some sort for this. Recently, mention of an Ogg-format video with Vorbis sound (and Divx;-) video, presumably) popped up on the MPlayer mailing list...

      I just wonder if Ogg will get more acceptance if/when it starts being used for both audio AND video (sort of like .asf?)

  • Why the PhatBox doesn't support Ogg (Score:3, Informative)

    by 3.1415926535 ( 243140 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:34PM (#2953399)
    The reason these guys don't support Ogg on the decoder end yet is that they're waiting for a free port of the Vorbis codec to the ARM7. Apparently, several ports exist but all are commercial and require a license fee, which Kenwood appears to be unwilling to pay.
    • Perhaps someone could explain why the parent is "informative" -- the Vorbis codec is free in every sense. That was the whole freakin' point of the Ogg Vorbis project, for Bob's sake.



      You're really telling me that Kenwood engineers are too damned lazy to build Vorbis for the ARM7 architecture?

      • what a troll.
        the codec is free, the implentations do not exist for that arch though.

        And no, the kenwood engineers aren't lazy. Their standpoint is, give us a codebase to support it and we will. I believe that is respectable at this point, as its not profitable for them to support a format that isn't in wide use (yet?).
      • You're really telling me that Kenwood engineers are too damned lazy to build Vorbis for the ARM7 architecture?

        Well, the ARM doesn't have support for floating point math, so even if they could build it, it would be too slow to be useful. It's not just a matter of typing "make".

      • This is exactly the reason why I wondered if RMS should ever have given his blessing for the Ogg license switch. It would be one thing for someone to develop an Ogg implementation for ARM7 and then say "I'll give it source and all to the first person who coughs up $5m" but another entirely to say "we've done the work and we'll license it to you, why do you need a Free version?" The reason I feel the second options is so much worse is that it can tempt people out of doing work far easier than the Free version could (can you afford $5m? can you afford $2 / instance? How much will development cost and how many instances will be sold?)

        Hopefully Ogg will survive this sort of teething (imagine if a modified hacked licensed ARM implementation became the de facto Ogg standard beacuse Sony use it in their OggMan). In the meantime I'm not happy about Ogg as a format anymore.

  • The folks at PhatNoise worked a deal with Kenwood to get these out this month. Music Keg. Hmm. A big, heavy, potbellied, silver container that you tap for music? Well, I don't like this new name, but the PhatBox is very cool.

    Ogg support is great, but what I was especially excited to hear was that one of the devs at phatnoise (Brendan) recently got flac working with the PhatBox/Music Keg:
    > So the Phatbox now plays FLAC files. Although, it's not yet in the
    > standard firmware download from the web page, and encoding is not yet
    > included in the capabilities of the Phatnoise Music Manager software.
    > (Although I hope to get the Windows software guys to include the
    > ability
    > to at least include .flac files in playlists soon and adding the
    > player
    > to the standard firmware distribution should be easy).

    Now if we could just get a portable iPod-like device to work with flac....

  • Divx ;-) (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ColaMan ( 37550 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:37PM (#2953406) Journal
    Why did they have to screw a reasonably decent codec by calling it "divx ;-)"?

    I can see the proposals now ...

    Engineer's email : "Well, we could use intel's I.263 codec or we could go with Divx ;-)"

    PHB Thought Process: "Divx-wink? That must be some sort of in-joke... hmmm , better go for I.263..... that sounds technical."

    And Divx ;-) loses again.

    Why? WHY?
    • Score 2, Funny?

      Nope. He's got a good point here. Linux project names are hopelessly lame. Ogg Vorbis? Divx-wink? Gimp? These names don't connote serious tools for serious work -- these names connote geeky in-jokes... which is fine, but seriously, it doesn't help linux break into mainstream acceptance one bit.

      ~jeff
    • As I understand it, DivX 3.11 used the smiley. The DivX version doesn't have it anymore -- it's just plain DivX.

      So DivX;-) refers to the old version.

  • divx is ok, but... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Restil ( 31903 ) on Monday February 04, 2002 @10:38PM (#2953409) Homepage
    Its a great codec for providing near dvd quality at a much lower bitrate than an mpeg file of the same quality. But you lose out because it takes significntly more processing power to play. It also is a hog to encode. And since its not a streaming format, it rules itself out as a live broadcasting medium.

    Ogg Tarkin might have some promise, but until there's something there to play with, its not going to do me much good.

    -Restil
    • If you want streaming "DivX" then just use real MPEG-4 (Quicktime) ... DivX is just a name for MPEG-4 compressed video stored in the crappy (2GB limit, no timestamps, no VBR audio suport) unstreamable AVI format.

    • The difference between a streaming video format and a non-streaming one is just in the semantics. MPlayer can play partialy downloaded DivX files while they are still being downloaded, and it continues to play frames as they are recieved. So you could say that MPlayer can "stream" DivX just fine.

  • KHD-CX910
    Kenwood Excelon Music Keg Digital Media Storage

    AVAILABLE FEBRUARY 2002
    The Kenwood Music Keg encodes, records, organizes, stores and plays up 10 gigs of MP3, WMA, and WAV digital music files in your car (works out to roughly 2500 MP3 songs).

    It connects with all existing Kenwood head units with CD changer control, without the need for additional displays or buttons. Plus, the Music Keg fits easily into most CD changer locations.

    Here's how it works... The Music Keg comes with the Keg itself, USB computer desktop cradle, storage cartridge, and user-friendly Kenwood PhatNoise Music Manager software. With the Music Manager software on your PC, you'll be able to create, manage and record playlists - you'll even be able to use the Music Manager to create and manage playlists that you burn to CDs. When you're ready to take your music out to your car, all you need to do is insert the Music Keg cartridge into the USB cradle and synchronize your music collection on your PC to the storage cartridge. Insert the recorded cartridge into the Music Keg installed in your car, and play and control music through your car head unit. Kenwood head units that have text display support will even display song names and playlist titles on the head unit.

    Be among the first to find out when the Kenwood Music Keg hits authorized dealers. Sign up here.

    KEY FEATURES
    - Cartridge Stores 10GB (Roughly 2,500 Songs)
    - Compatible with All 2001-2002 Kenwood Head Units with Changer Control and CD text Capability
    - Records, Organizes, Stores and Plays Digital Music Files: MP3, WMA and WAV
    - System Includes Car Unit, Music Storage Cartridge and Desktop Unit

    CAR UNIT FEATURES
    - Compatible with All 2001-2002 Kenwood Head Units with Changer Control and CD text Capability
    - Digital-to-Analog Converter: 24-bit
    - Displays MP3 File Names and ID3 Tags
    - Mounts Like Standard Changers

    MUSIC STORAGE CARTRIDGE FEATURES
    - 10GB Storage Capacity (Roughly 2,500 Songs)
    - Internal Shock-Absorbing Suspension

    DESKTOP UNIT FEATURES
    - Available as Accessory for Use with Multiple Computers
    - USB Connection

    MUSIC MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE FEATURES
    - Downloads via Internet
    - Encodes MP3, WMA and WAV File Formats
    - Integrated Web Browser
    - Multiple MP3/WMA Compression Rates: up to 320kbps (Selectable)
    - Playlist Capability: up to 999 (with up to 999 Songs in each)
    - Variable Bit-Rate Compatible
  • When I read the title, I thought the good news could be related to the Sorensen codec [pubnix.com].
    Gotta pay more attention next time, as it explicitly says OPEN-CODEC (well, we can always dream on the day Apple will set it free :)
  • They don't mention what interface the cradle uses, do you think it's USB? That would seem to be the most compatible right now, but the transfer speeds are not fast enough to make you want to transfer 10GB very often. I guess that most people's music collections will fit on the hard disc, but I hope the bundled software would be smart enough to synchronize someone's music collection with the disk without transferring the files that have already been copied over..
    • It comes with a USB cradle, and Windows software. Linux support is available at http://unix.phatnoise.com/. The software is smart enough to not re-copy a file that is already on the cartridge. I had one long copy of several gigs, then when I add content it only takes a few minutes each time to copy over the new files.
  • Last time we checked the DivX site, it said there were licensing fees due if we used DivX commercially.

  • Clarifications (Score:2, Informative)

    by shoemakc ( 448730 )
    The original version of divx [ divx ;-) ] was a hacked version of the MS MPEG-4 codec with data-rate and play time restrictions removed.

    The project mayo codec (Divx 4.x) was a complete re-write from scratch based on the MPEG-4 specification...fully backwards compatable with divx ;-) content. Aside from being perfectly legal, it also adds goodies such as VBR and multi-pass encoding.

    The article, though desribed poorly on slashdot, is stating that DivxNetworks (The people now behind project mayo) have licensed their divx 4.x codec to Fraunhofer Germany, not the other way around.

    -Chris

  • Another win for piracy! (Score:2, Troll)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Oh, I mean, open source and freedom of information.
  • I'd like to see that "Organic Electro Luminescent display." So OLEDs are here?
    • They've been here for awhile. Pioneer has had them available on car stereos since at least 1996. Note I have yet to see one that does red. All of the ones I have seen are EITHER blue OR green. They are not full color. The current ones are also usually 4-bit (16 shades.)
      • Well then you should Check Here. [kodak.com]
        or more to the point The ones they're selling here. [kodak.com]
        They do have nice pictures of a hypothetical mockup of an active matrix full color OLED, and Researchers have proven that True Color can be reproduced with OLEDs. However the cost of actually building one would be pretty insane right now.
        One last thing Sanyo will be making Active matrix OLED displays. [kodak.com] they should be up to full speed at the plant by 2003, so full color active matrix displays should start showing up on highend Kodak digital cameras around that time frame, and perhaps even high end PDAs. Who can argue with low power vibrant picture indoors or outdoors for a PDA? Maybe by 2007 Nintendo will release a portable with OLEDs, if they're cheap enough by then they should.
  • Divx ;-) with the smiley is version 3.* and is a hack of a microsoft codec. what we are talking about here is DivX4 by DivXNetworks http://www.divx.com/ it is completely different, it is incompatible, and is not a hack of any other codec. the similarities are that they both have similar names and both are based on mpeg4 technology.

    • Thank you (Score:2, Insightful)

      by hendridm ( 302246 )
      I was hoping someone someone would point this out. I'm sick of people outing the DivX codec because they think it is a hack of a legitimate one. The DivX 4 one isn't, and it's superior to the hacked one in countless ways.

      >it is completely different, it is incompatible,

      Well, sort of. If you install the DivX 4 codec, you can *play* DivX 3.x media.
  • DivX may be somewhat popular now as a MPEG-4 "based" codec, but I don't see it holding up against real, standard MPEG-4. If it isn't an open codec (as suggested by the need to license it), DivX will have no real advantage. At least MPEG-4 on it's own is a standard, with encoders and players being developed by several different parties, which should (in theory) be compatible with each other. I'm tired of hunting for codecs every time I DL a video in some crazy format.

    You'll still have to buy a license for MPEG-4 if you try to make a profit from M4V content, but for non-profit uses it won't cost anything to distribute. Why settle for half-baked imitations?
  • This is a main hurdle towards widespread use of Ogg Vorbis, support on a wide variety of non-computer platforms. There are CD-MP3 players made by most all manufacturers [read: DVD players that also play MP3 CDs] and portable CD-MP3/Nomad players also don't support Ogg. When it is supported by major manufacturers on hardware devices, Ogg will have a much more legitimate stand in the future of music.

    That, and when major MP3 releasing groups [pirate groups] start offering their rips in Ogg format, the kids will begin using it and demanding it in their portable players.

    --adam

    I metamod as I see fit!
    • So MP3 is superior to Vorbis just because more people use it?
      NO! No matter how widely MP3 is supported, Vorbis is clearly technologically superior.
      If MP3 doesn't compress better than Vorbis, then I don't call it superior.
      If MP3 isn't as flexible as Vorbis, I don't call it superior.
  • I don't see how this helps. Maybe there are open source implementations of MPEG-4, but MPEG-4 is patented. Even if divx.com wanted to open source a decoder, other patent holders would probably want their cut.

    (Whether MPEG-4 audio/video contains any technology that should have been patentable is another question.)

  • It appears that Phat Noise works with Linux. I suppose the Music Keg will as well.


    unix.phatnoise.com [phatnoise.com]

  • ...the entire article posted on slashdot is false.

    How quaint.
  • The DivX ;-) people getting involved with Fahnhofer can only mean patent cross-licensing and competitive positioning. Didn't you people read the prior article about MPEG4 licensing? It's not a good situation.
  • While integrating the Phatbox with a Kenwood display is a sweet user interface improvement, the Phatbox is still severely lacking in the area of song navigation. If you have 2,000 songs on the player, how do you find a particular song that you want to listen to? Unless you have an incredibly well organized playlist setup, it is almost impossible.

    What would be fantastic is an Empeg/riocar style remote control, where you can spell out the name of the song you want to hear (the same way you might spell something out on a telephone keypad). Also, you don't have to triple-click to get exact letters like you do on a cell phone, because the software automatically narrows down all possbile song names on the fly. Usually you only have to hit the first three or four letter to get your song. It's very sweet, especially if you're like me and often get the urge to listen to completly random songs when you're driving.

    -Adam
  • Wow, anyone with a brain could have seen that the article about Fraunhoffer licensing an Open Source DivX implementation was false.

    If it was open source, they wouldn't need to license it...
  • Sight, when will we learn?
    OpenDivX is open source (though strictly speaking, even OpenDivX isn't open source, because of the OpenDivX license which isn't approved by the OSI).
    However, DivX 4 is NOT OpenDivX!

    Project Mayo started the OpenDivX project.
    But when it progressed nicely and produced nice video quality, they killed the project and used that code to create DivX 4 (they claim that DivX 4 is a rewrite, but that's false).
    They just deceived all those developers yet nobody seem to care.

    Please, somebody, tell timothy and the Slashdot community about this, because I'm just a little voice in hundreds of comments.
  • The Dixv codec was licensed by Fraunhofer IGD (here in Darmstadt, next building) which has little to do with the Fraunhofer IIS (in Erlangen) the co-inventors of MP3. So, yes it has been licensed but nothing to "drool" about :-)
  • As I sit here in my house coat, cold in the winter:

    A 100+1 disc player. More than 100 I don't care. It must be software upgradable [we have come to that point right?]. It plays any codec which is ported, and you slip in a burned or payed-for-subscription CD. It's upgraded to the latest codecs.

    I can play 100 MP3, OGG, playlists etc. Let me simply browse by playlist [maybe I make playlists for my CD's which I convert to OGG] or by song. Let me randomly play by folder, disc, and complete CD catalog.

    I'm hooked

    Isn't this what everyone wants? Let us burn CD's to 'upgrade' or 'update' the machine, er component. If you can't, $5 per year for 'updates'. Did I mention... it must be able to output to at least RCA cables so that I can use it with my stereo.

    Is it that hard? They've got 100, 200 and 500 disc players. Just give us this... please! It's a hardware hack. Please?
  • Hi,

    the Fraunhofer Institute that licensed the
    DIVX Coces (IGD) is not the same Institute
    that developed mp3 (IIS).

    All Fraunhofer Institutes are under one
    umbrella, but they are _very_ independent, some
    like each other, some not.

    And yes, i know a lot about them, 'cause
    i worked at Fraunhofer IIS ;-)

    Bye,

    Jürgen
  • I'm in the market for a new player at the moment, I have a few tens of gigs of MP3 files[1] that I'd happily convert to Vorbis *if* there was a decent[1] handheld Vorbis player.

    [1] Ripped from my own CD collection.
    [2] Good sound quality, high capacity[3], reliable and easy to use.
    [3] >>64Mb.

  • DivX correction.. (Score:2, Redundant)

    by Junta ( 36770 )
    Sure, OpenDivX is open, but that's dead. Seems that they opened DivX for a while, milked open source for all they felt they could, and then losed and is taking it further commercially, trying to get a patent and probably getting together with Fraunhoffer because they lack the resources to take it further.

    It would be one thing if it was a good, closed from the beginning project. However, they essentially exploited open source developers whose work may soon be packaged for sale with no compensation whatsoever...

    Of course, XVid (http://www.videocoding.de/) has branched the OpenDivx code since its death, but if the "creators" of OpenDivx get the patent, XVid could be shut out through this. In a sane world they couldn't possibly get a patent on this (since they really didn't build the codec themselves), but in this world...

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close