VP3, Open Source Video at 200kbs

Honest Man noted that intel is hyping VP3 as the first low bitrate open source video codec. 200kbs for VHS quality video sounds good to me, especially when I can apt-get it. But is DivX already to entrenched in this niche?

Comments

Boosting Ego / Marketshare

[CmdrPaco]

warning: not a troll, just an observation: Is this just a cheap ploy to sell P4's? This seems like Intel is just tooting their own horns about this technology, and claiming it's only for P4's.

Quick Answer

[theantix]

Is DivX ;) entrenched in the market? Well, how many non-technical people have heard of it? How many PCs is it bundled with? It has a reputation for being primarily used for pirated video (regardless of the truth). So, the answer is a resounding "no, it isn't entrenched".

Re:Quick Answer

[jvj24601]

It has a reputation for being primarily used for pirated video

So did MP3. Sometimes being first is more important than being better.

Re:Will the MPAA allow Intel to do this?

[steve_bryan]

Right, they'll sue Intel when hell freezes over. The last thing they would try is to sue anyone with the resources to defend themselves and the 'political' stature to laugh off the lies and slurs the MPAA might attempt.

Open source? Looks like $395 to me....

[Lawmeister]

it may be open source, but it sure isn't cheap...

Intel's link takes you to on2.com's website where they have this to say:

With the VP3 for Windows codec, you can encode VP3 video and play it back through the Windows Media Player! The VP3 for Windows codec allows you to encode VP3 video using any Video for Windows compatible encoding application (such as Adobe Premiere and Virtual Dub) and play it back through the Windows Media Player. This version comes with limited email support. $395 USD"

The free open source versions can be found at www.vp3.com, but it looks like Intel is promoting them the big bucks version.

Dig deeper next time...

[Svartalf]

http://www.vp3.com has the real goods- Had you looked at the link on the bottom of On2's website, you'd have seen the link for the Open Source release of VP3. Open Source doesn't mean that they can't still be selling the versions of the codec that are "certified" (as in supported- they're offering limited support for the open source release...).

Not free software

[oddityfds]

I'd say it is non-free software. This is cited from what they added:

[2.1] (e) Notwithstanding Sections 2.1 (a), (b), and (c) above, no license is granted to You, under any intellectual property rights including patent rights, to modify the code in such a way as to create or accept data that is incompatible with data produced or accepted by the Original Code.

and

[2.2] e) Notwithstanding Sections 2.2 (a), (b), and (c) above, no license may be granted to You by Contributor, under any intellectual property rights including patent rights, to modify the code in such a way as to create or accept data that is incompatible with data produced or accepted by the Original Code.

It is not GPL-compatible, anyway.

Re:Quality comparison?

[rho]

The big problem with this is that perception is individualistic. Similar to how "golden ears" can perceive compression artifacts in MP3, "golden eyes" can perceive artifacts in compressed video.

For example, DVD compression drives me into a blind rage everytime I see those fat pixels in the shadows of dramatically lit masterpieces, I have to supress an urge to go on a murderous rampage across the desks of hundreds of idiots who thought that MPEG-2 would be "good enough".

Now, I am forced to rent a DVD before I'll consent to purchase it, just to see if I'm going to be irritated by compression artifacts. I'm not gonna blow some $20 on a screwed up compression job.