Sometimes more prevalent = better because if your viewers aren't willing to download divix to view your videos, they'll be staring at a blank screen.

Good point - too bad Divx doesn't have some sort of an auto download mechanism like Flash does - it would help spread the word I guess.

Oh well....

Cliff Etzel - Solo Video Journalist
bluprojekt

I have always been an advocate of DivX and have always said it is a far superior format than what is widely available today.
Whne you cosnider that a DIvX video at 1mbps looks just as good as an MPG atp 8mbs it makes you wonder why he format wasnt adopted by many others.
Ful intra frame encoding, minimal CPU and HW requirements and absolutely pukes on EVERYTHING... even AVCHD. AVCHD at 1mbps doesnt even look that good and its a newer format...

Sadly the masses do not understand the value of this format, and with Adobes push with the Macrovision buy out, i dont even thnk we'll see DivX as being a "regular" format for web, or for actual delivery

i tend to agree with deusx, but then again, nearly everyone i know not in the business has, at some stage or other, downloaded the divix player.

is it such a hangup nowadays to download a player?

leslie

"AVCHD at 1mbps doesn't even look that good and its a newer format... "

Seriously, that is the silliest statement ever. If you cannot get H.264 AVC encodes to look better at the same bit rate as a Divx file, then frankly, you suck as a compressionist.

The only thing that Divx has going for it right now is hardware player support, and can play on just about all computers. This comes from someone who has spent a lot of time using Divx/Xvid/H.264 AVC/WMV9/VC1/ etc....

That would be Macromedia.

I think a lot of what stalled Divx was commercial considerations.

Rob Mack

" . . you suck as a compressionist.

Then teach us, Patrick. Teach us. I for one am listening very hard indeed to what you say next.

Best regards

Graham Bernard

funny that comment ,but almighty p@st whatever must know something we dont.. lol
I wont lower myself to join any insult slanging match

All I'll add is that one thing I've learned in this game is a large slab of humility goes a long way. People have very long memories in this business and what you say today can come back to bite you decades later.

Bob.

Here is something else that excites me about divx. I have a client who is looking to do "pay per view" type internet viewing for some footage that he has (30 years worth) and he wants a model that allows him to make money off of it. DivX provides a few options for this and makes this a lot more viable for him (and me).

DivX Content Distribution

By the way, if you go to a site that has divx content, does not the active x bar pop up and ask you to download the web player? I thought it did, but all of my pc's have divx so I don't remember if it does or not. If someone does not have divx and wants to try it, go here: divx samples

j razz

Agree - and it's even more so if you put it in writing!
lili

Don't forget all the extended features of DivX either: subtitles, alternate audio tracks and menus. If I do an SD DivX encode, it will play back on almost all the video devices I own: Archos PMP, Philips portable DVD player, Philips home DVD player, PS3, and even my old and extremely slow P3 laptop that my seven year old son uses. The encodes are much faster than than with newer codecs as well.

>>By the way, if you go to a site that has divx content, does not the active x bar pop up and ask you to download the web player? <<

Yeah, it does, but then you have to run a "manual" setup routine with multiple dialog boxes, and choices about what components to install, plus it ask you if you want to install the Yahoo (I think) toolbar. A world away from the background flash installation.

I wasn't insulting anyone and my post wasn't directed to any specific individual. It was a general statement. One needs to look no further than sites like doom9 to see what the latest and greatest quality encoders, codecs, decoders, etc... are out there.

H.264 AVC will be used in Adobe's Media Player, later released this year that also provides DRM, PPV, etc... models.

There is a reason Divx bought Mainconcept and it wasnt because they wanted to kill the competition. H.264 AVC is the immediate future and provides vastly superior quality at the same bit rate, which delivers higher quality at the SAME FILE SIZE.

Jrazz,
I've purchased the Divx software, love the potential, and I've been thinking of loading Divx videos onto my website. I wanted to see what someone would encounter if they went to a site and they didn't have Divx, so I took all the Divx software off my system, and then clicked on the link above to your website.

Here's what happened, and here's the downfall of Divx as compared to what Nolonemo correctly says about flash: 1), First, after I clicked on the message on your webpage ("click here to install the following ActiveX control: 'Divx Web Player' from Divx, Inc.), a popup came up across the top of the Internet Explorer window saying, "This website wants to install the following add-on: "Divx Web Player from Divx, Inc. If you trust the website and the add-on and want to install it, click here." So far, so good. I clicked yes. 2) A message came up, "Do you want to install this software Divx Web Player?" Options: Install, Don't Install. I clicked Install. 3) Downloading 6076 kb. 4) Message pops up: "License Agreement bs, yada, yada..." for Divx Web Player Bundle Setup. Options: Accept or not. I accepted. 5) Next window: Choose components. Options: Divx Web Player and/or Divx Content Uploader. I chose both. 5) Next window: Destination folder options. I chose default. 6) It installs in a minute or so. 7) Installation complete window pops up, you're required to click on "Complete." 8) At that time, the stage6.com website opens up in a new window. 9) I click back to your webpage, and clicked on the video I wanted to see ("Promo Video"). It says that it starts to "buffer," but in actuality I think it was just downloading the full file to my hard drive, because it took between 7-9 minutes before the video file would even BEGIN to play.

In summary: most people are NOT going to go through that to play a couple minute video file on a webpage. I was annoyed at the process myself... in total it took me almost 15-17 minutes to see your video. That is Divx's problem here.

I love DivX but I have to agree. I've spent enough time trying to talk people through the installation process via phone to know that as simple as it is, many people just aren't tech savy enough to get it. Not only that, but many office or hotel computers won't allow you to install even something as simple as the DivX viewer.

Also add that now that H.264 AVC is included in Flash Player by Adobe, there is nothing additional for the consumer to do to enjoy higher quality content instead of having to download additional players etc...

On the advice of jrazz I started using Divx and I love it. The quality is amazing and the resultant file size is even MORE amazing. In my opinion, from the production end it is a no-brainer. Admittedly, from the user end it is a mess and I share the same concerns mentioned here. I'm hoping a flood of feedback to the dev team will bring about the necessary changes. Perhaps there are other methods/codecs that will allow one to squeeze a little more quality out of a project but I for one don't have the time or desire to "tinker" with settings. I simply want it to look great at the push of a button and that's exactly what I get from Divx.

While researching Flash I found countless complaints about installation issues with the latest Flash player and many frustrated users who had all but given up on finding a solution. I concluded that a lengthy installation that ends in success is always better than a simple one that ends in failure.

For now, I'm hoping that users who navigate to my content have done so with enough determination to view said content that they will endure the installation process.

I think those of us who are proponents of Divx, owe it to ourselves to voice our concerns with the dev team.

I use DivX to upload to youtube. I get much better results then with Windows media or Quictime.

Although I do have to render as AVI from Vegas and then use DivX converter. Would be cool if Vegas would have DivX render available...

Sami

One problem with Flash is that it won't work from a 64 bit browser. DivX and WMV on the other had will.

I have had no problem getting flash to work in a 64 bit browser. Wonder what settings I have that may be different.

You are right in that it does take time and effort to install the web player. I have and will continue to ask DivX if there is a way to make this process quicker and easier for the end user.

Thanks for pointing out the tediousness of it. I still think though that it is a great format for delivery and it gives excellent quality.

I am curious though as to why the buffering took so long on your system? I have watched several videos on stage 6 that were not in my system's buffer and there was no wait. Of course, I have a 10 meg internet connection so maybe that is the difference. Anyone else experience long wait times for videos? I know sometimes their servers have been slow in the past but they have recently added new ones that are faster and have more bandwith capabilities.

j razz

With DviX now owning MainConcept, expect big things to happen, particularly with regards to AVC and it's various avenues.