We actually worked tightly with xvid specifically so that xvid stream would work in all DivX decoders also. Xvid obviously can’t license to CE manufacturers because of mpeg-la niceties (mpeg-la is entitled to fees for just compiling the code). Competeing development towards commons goals with xvid has helped us both. We are forced to keep strong development and they are insured of hardware support. (If you look in the code you will see they include DivX certified profiles inside xvid). So for general purposes, there really isn’t a functional distinction between xvid and divx.


There is a good chance the browser side will come out in a few weeks (I am guessing right after everyone gets back from new years).


Another arena is the online distribution. That is still very early in the game. Who is to say that there won’t be a lot of paid content in avi? In fact, in italt, there is already a good market of DivX discs sold at retail establishments of current Hollywood releases. In brazil, they are included with new DVD players (sometimes three feature films per disc). And these aren’t obscure titles. These are new release top tier movies. I know that itunes has sold millions of music videos, but on a sheer number of minutes scale, they are still tens if not hundreds of billions of minutes behind existing (grey or not) avi content.


We have already announced lower level content deals (Image Entertainment, very long tail), but don’t be surprised if you see some DivX online stores in the next year.


I’m certainly not saying that we are trailblazers leading the pack, but don’t write us off. And please, keep up the dialog. One truly unique position you have with DivX is that we are here and listening.


From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 10:12 AM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [videoblogging] Re: DivX - Shameless Plug


Cheers :)

My impression of things is probably a bit wrong, Im probably
underestimating the number of DivX certified players etc that exist.
And yes when thinking of videoblogging, Im not thinking of the
billions of legacy files that consumers want to play, indeed Im
avoiding talking about that stuff at all because its 'grey' to say the
least. Still it is similar to how mp3 become the established standard
for audio. DivX doesnt dominate to quite the extent mp3 does though, I
see a lot of xvid stuff floating around, but maybe they are pretty

Regarding mp4 support from the likes of Apple and Sony, it will be
interesting to see what happens. Apple have actually been good about
this so far, they could have limited ipod support to .mov containers
only, if they wanted to keep tighter control of ipod video creation
tools. They havent, theyve allowed normal m4 to work. The fact that
only baseline h264 works is likely due to the choice of decoder chip,
rather than a deliberate imcompatibility with PSP h264. Sony on the
otherhand have either due to sloppyness or deliberate policy, messed
with the PSP mp4 container, but it still hasnt stopped people creating
3rd party PSP video encoders.

Did you say in the pst that DivX are working on playback in browsers?
Compared to Apple's stuff thats where you are lacking most, and also
lacking something like itunes and content deals. Im not so sure all
those billions of legacy divx avi's will mean all that much to
hardware manufacturers in the longterm. When people are buying more
video online, it wont be in avi format. Couple that with phones &
other devices creating mp4's of one kind of another, and next-gen DVD
using h264, and I am not so sure DivX compatibility will continue to
be such a selling point for DVD hardware players etc in the future.

Steve of Elbows

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Vinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve,

> Not to butter you up or anything, but you are very insightful. I
> honestly appreciate these threads.
> There are published specs for avi and many other codecs and encoding
> applications create avi's. For the longterm CE manufacturers will
> support this format since there are billions of legacy files that the
> consumers want to play. Supporting our 'certified' profile gives them a
> competitive advantage, therefore they put it in the box.

> From my side of the playground, the apple mp4 support is more of a
> problem than a help. If anyone is going to make a vertically integrated
> closed system it will be apple. I would be surprised if apple and sony
> came together with a compatible format out of the kindness of their
> hearts. The slight differences are not an accident. Recent content deals
> on both sides drive an even deeper wedge between the psp and ipod. That
> is where we are trying to be part of the solution. We do have the
> leverage to make CE manufacturers implement a documented standard that
> is verifiably interoperable by someone outside of the production
> process. Also, due to required legacy support, even if we were evil,
> hand wringing, control freaks, we couldn't lock out the existing,
> non-DivX (r) encoding schemes.


Reply via email to