-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 14 October 2003 12:04 pm, Foo Lim wrote: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Mark K. Kim wrote: > > DivX's compression is definitely better than MPEG2. And somehow MPEG4 > > and DivX is related but I'm not exactly sure how. They seem to either > > share compression techniques or have the ability to embed one format in > > the other, or it's just a different name for the same thing -- I'm not > > sure. Anyway, MPEG4 and DivX are very comparable and a video made in one > > format seems to be playable in a player that understands the other > > format. > > > > -Mark > > I think 'DivX ;-)' was originally reverse-engineered from MS's MPEG4 > codec. Or the internals of the codec was hacked out. That's why they > used to be compatible, but the latest version of 'DivX ;-)' 5 (?) has > enough modifications to not be MPEG4 compatible.
DivX is a MPEG-4 implementation. DivX Networks claims it is MPEG4 compatible. XviD is a GPL'd MPEG-4 codec, and it's FAQ says it is ISO MPEG-4 compliant. Some say XviD is a better codec then DivX. I have no opinion. It has been gaining popularity as the codec to use for DVD rips. Not that I'd know anything about that. No sir, I'm a good little consumer. (Actualy, very few movies are worth the trouble to download...) - -- PGP/GPG Fingerprint: 3B30 C6BE B1C6 9526 7A90 34E7 11DF 44F3 7217 7BC7 On pgp.mit.edu, import with `gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key 72177BC7` Also available at http://www.cal.net/~ryan/ryan_at_mother_dot_com.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/jFTXEd9E83IXe8cRAvQwAJ9PoUp5r3ax2yHAYhbjjE/mMdGU4wCfWd6t MaEJyChqZKGpYDAVDBSYELs= =i5Pu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
