Printable View
If a group of independent programmers and develop such highly compressed video footage like Xvid and DivX, why cant' MS or Apple do the same? I mean they don't have to use Xvid or DivX, but why can't they create an equally strong codec....Mpeg-1,2, and 4 are good, but WTF.....
Any idea's on why this is
WMV9 is good too.
http://www.doom9.net for comparison tests.
DivX and XviD are Mpeg4-compliant codecs. so if you think DivX/XviD are good and Mpeg-4 isn't... i believe you're confused.Quote:
Originally posted by hey_suburbia@26 September 2003 - 09:44
If a group of independent programmers and develop such highly compressed video footage like Xvid and DivX, why cant' MS or Apple do the same? I mean they don't have to use Xvid or DivX, but why can't they create an equally strong codec....Mpeg-1,2, and 4 are good, but WTF.....
Apple have developed QuickTime Mpeg-4, and Microsoft have developed their own version of Mpeg-4 and called it Windows Media Video. DivX 3.11 was a hack of an early WMV beta version.
for the record-- DivX, XviD, Apple Mpeg-4 and WMV are all Mpeg-4. three of them are proprietary commercial products, and XviD is open source.
It really doesnt matter. With big companies its all about the money and patents <_<
If everything was opensource then there would be no confusion.