Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

VP3, Open Source Video at 200kbs

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the lower-bitrate-pr0n dept.

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?

5 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Quick Answer by theantix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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".

    --
    501 Not Implemented
    1. Re:Quick Answer by jvj24601 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It has a reputation for being primarily used for pirated video

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

  2. Re:Will the MPAA allow Intel to do this? by steve_bryan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. Open source? Looks like $395 to me.... by Lawmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. Not free software by oddityfds · · Score: 5, Insightful
    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.