Slashdot Mirror


New Mac Divx.com Codec Released

Phunky Monkey writes "The Divx.com codec for Mac, version 5.0a2, has been released. New features include a completely new AVI doctoring app, and the Divx 5.0.2 decoder core (same as the most recent PC version). This version also introduces a new technique of fixing AVI files that allows them to be played as well on Macs as on PCs using the same file. Download it, and read the details about all the new features." I just wish QuickTime 6 came wih DivX and AC3 decoders included. Durnit.

29 comments

  1. C: A Dead Language? by pwpbot · · Score: -1

    Gentlemen the time has come for a serious discussion on whether or not to continue using C for serious programming projects As I will explain I feel that C needs to be retired much the same way that Fortran Cobol and Perl have been Furthermore allow me to be so bold as to suggest a superior replacement to this outdated languageTo give you a little background on this subject I was recently asked to develop a clientserver project on a Unix platform for a Fortune 500 company While Ive never coded in C before I have coded in VB for fifteen years and in Java for over ten I was stunned to see how poorly C fared compared to these two more lowlevel languagesCs biggest difficulty as we all know is the fact that it is by far one of the slowest languages in existance especially when compared to more modern languages such as Java and C Although the reasons for this are varied the main reasons seems to be the way C requires a programmer to laboriously work with chunks of memoryRequiring a programmer to manipulate blocks of memory is a tedious way to program This was satisfactory back in the early days of coding but then again so were punchcards By using what are called pointers a C programmer is basically requiring the computer to do three sets of work rather than one The first time requires the computer to duplicate whatever is stored in the memory space pointed to by the pointer The second time requires it to perform the needed operation on this space Finally the computer must delete the duplicate set and set the values of the original accordinglyClearly this is a horrendous use of resources and the chief reason why C is so slow When one looks at a more modern and a more serious programming language like Java C or even better Visual Basic that lacks such archaic coding styles one will also note a serious speed increase over CSo what does this mean for the programming community I think clearly that C needs to be abandonded There are two candidates that would be a suitable replacement for it Those are Java and Visual BasicHaving programmed in both for many years I believe that VB has the edge Not only is it slightly faster than Java its also much easier to code in I found C to be confusing frightening and intimidating with its nonGUIbased coding style Furthermore I like to see the source code of the projects I work with Javas source seems to be under the monopolistic thumb of Sun much the way that GCC is obscured from us by the marketing people at the FSF Microsofts shared source under which Visual Basic is released definately seems to be the most fair and reasonable of all the licenses in existance with none of the harsh restrictions of the BSD license It also lacks the GPLs requirement that anything coded with its tools becomes property of the FSFI hope to see a switch to VB very soon Ive already spoken with various luminaries in the nix coding world and most are eager to begin to transition Having just gotten off the phone with Mr Alan Cox I can say that he is quite thrilled with the speed increases that will occur when the Linux kernel is completely rewritten in Visual Basic Richard Stallman plans to support this and hopes that the great Swede himself Linux Torvaldis wont object to renaming Linux to VBLinux Although not a C coder himself Im told that Slashdots very own Admiral Taco will support this on his web site Finally Dennis Ritchie is excited about the switchThank you for your time Happy coding

  2. fnfp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    first non faggot post

  3. Why not just use QuickTime 6? by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since Divx 5.0 is MPEG-4 and QT 6 includes an MPEG-4 codec, who needs Divx any more?

    1. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by wizbit · · Score: 1

      I *think* the Quicktime DivX codec from divx.com supports more formats, including backward compatibility with older DivX standards - whereas actual MPEG4 files aren't as proliferant. DivX makes the codec for all us movie traders :)

    2. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by benwaggoner · · Score: 5, Informative

      .divx is not the same as .mp4. .divx is an AVI file with MPEG-4 video and (generally MP3) audio. A real MP4 file would use AAC audio, and be in the MPEG-4 file format.

      Of course, QuickTime knows how to play MPEG-4 video, MP3 audio, and read AVI files, so it seems like it would be a trivial task for Apple to have QuickTime be able to play .divx files.

      Hopefully DivxNetworks will adopt .mp4 as their file format in the future. AVI is really not a good format (hence all the sync problems non-Windows Divx players have), and AAC is a lot better than MP3 and AC-3.

    3. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'm glad your message got rated "informative."

      OK, so it's a codec. Why in the world, since I have QT Pro, would I want to mess around with some PC company's codec. There's zilch on their site about Macs.

      There's a place to download it for Mac and here it is and that's all. Nada.

      Why would anyone be dumb enough to stick something on their Mac running OSX that's a PC Codec of some weird kind?

      Why shouldn't I wait for 10.2 and QT Pro 6? I don't want the stupid Windows player and I don't want some PC company's codec.

      What's wrong with that? You know it would be nice if they had something on their site other than a FAQ for 12 year olds and that isn't easy to find. No info. No "why you Mac users should have this codec." Nada I trashed it.

    4. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There are already THOUSANDS of full length divx movies out there and NO MP4 movies. All my friends have lots of GB of divx and NO MP4. If I want to play and of these THOUSANDS of divx movies on a Mac I NEED a codec.

    5. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 0, Troll

      DIVX is NOT MPEG4. All DIVX codecs are AWFUL, do NOT support these pirate pricks by using their shitware. If you want a top quality, low band codec for QT, use Sorenson Video 3.1 or one of Apple's excellent MJPEG options. DIVX SUCKS.

      --
      That was classic intercourse!
    6. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      has it ever occured to you that being an individual might be more fun? If you really want to fit in, get a fucking PC

    7. Re:Why not just use QuickTime 6? by diverman · · Score: 1

      You're still clinging to OS/2, aren't you? Although I'm sure your statement was largely just trying to inflame others, surely you have to recognize the stupidity of your statement. :)

      -Alex

  4. Next time it comes around on the kernel... by BandwidthHog · · Score: 4, Funny

    I grabbed and installed this the other day. Apparently I'll be able to use it next time I reboot.

    Whenever that may be. (Thanks, BSD/NeXT/Mach!)

    --

    Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
    1. Re:Next time it comes around on the kernel... by rufo · · Score: 2, Informative

      The installer lies, as most do under Mac OS X. I've been using DivX 5.0a2 since it first came out and I haven't had to reboot yet. Just make sure you quit and relaunch QuickTime Player and you should be set.

      --
      My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.
  5. Alternatives for DivX on OSX by bjtuna · · Score: 5, Informative

    Both VideoLan Client and the MPlayer OSX port will let you play DivX files under OSX without having to doctor the file first. Sound works too!

    1. Re:Alternatives for DivX on OSX by aberkvam · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure why you linked to VersionTracker instead of the developer's site for MPlayerOSX.

      I'm just trying to make everyone's life a little easier by saving a couple of clicks... ;-)

    2. Re:Alternatives for DivX on OSX by bjtuna · · Score: 2

      Ya, I just didn't try real hard to find the developer's site, thats all. the first few hits on Google were from Versiontracker and something similar, and hey I'm a busy man. Thanks for the link though, it's in my bookmarks now :)

  6. AIM compatible? by CalCudahy · · Score: 1

    The last release was, strangly enough, known to freeze up AOL Instant Messenger. Does this new version fix that bug?

    --
    "I think the U.N. is going to find that the blame lies with all the Sudanese rap music that glamorizes genocide."
    1. Re:AIM compatible? by snyperm · · Score: 1

      Yeah this doens't have the quicktime/AIM conflict so feel free to install and use it. Coincidentally that last release could still be used with aim if you removed the quicktime component and left the other one if put in the plugins folder IIRC.

      Actually I just realized UI'm using the noAd version of AIM so maybe th ads use quicktime which may still cause conflict...so I guess i reall have no answer for you.

  7. Do any grown-ups use Macs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I was wondering, because I infer from the Slashdot stories that Mac users spend
    all day watching movies and listening to mp3s. What do grown-ups use the Mac for?

    1. Re:Do any grown-ups use Macs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same thing adult PC users- porn

  8. For Fuck's Sake!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Maybe you mac faggots should just give in and get a real operating system instead of waiting for software that's been on Windows for months now.

    1. Re:For Fuck's Sake!! by penguin341 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Define real operating system you stupid AC

      --
      No sig. Never.
  9. qt6 by zephc · · Score: 3

    has anyone actually tried it under the QT6 public release? I had to uninstall 6 and go back to 5 becuz the previous divx.com plugin did not work.

    --
    "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    1. Re:qt6 by pudge · · Score: 1

      I couldn't get a movie of mine to play under QuickTime 6 on Mac OS X with this codec, but it worked fine under Mac OS 9. I didn't spend much time trying to figure out why though.

    2. Re:qt6 by aberkvam · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have been using DivX.com 5.0a2 with QuickTime 6 under Mac OS X 10.1.5 and it's been running fine for me. On the other hand, it was running fine with DivX.com 5.0a1 and QuickTime 6 too. What do you mean by "did not work"? More details would give people the details they need to offer good suggestions.

    3. Re:qt6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had issues with Divx under qt6 as well. All the movies which played fine under qt5 now just show white as the entire video stream. MP3 Audio works, though.

  10. I AGREE WITH THIS POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    n/t

  11. Anyone able to play the NWN Asgard movie? by frankie · · Score: 2

    http://nwvault.ign.com/features/previews/Asgard Trailers.shtml

    I've tried it using every codec and video player I could find. Is WiMP on a PC the only thing that works?

    1. Re:Anyone able to play the NWN Asgard movie? by damiam · · Score: 1

      It works fine for me using an mplayer CVS snapshot with the ffmpeg/libavcodec DivX codec under Debian.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  12. I AGREED WITH THIS LAMP POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GREED POST LAMP FUCK