Slashdot Mirror
Divx Now Adware Supported Only
bogomip_bandit writes "The divx codec is no longer free, no strings attached. Until recently, when downloading the codec from divx.com, one could select Dr Divx for a price, Divx Pro for a price, the divx codec for free, or the divx codec with bundled adware to help support divx development etc. Recently the site has changed. Now when one visits the download page, the only free codec you can download is adware supported. This means even to just watch divx movies and not do any actual enncoding, one has to install adware on their machine. I for one will be finding a different video codec." Sounds like a good reason (if you needed one) to look curiously at Ogg Theora. Update: 08/20 20:04 GMT by T : Correction: As several readers have pointed out, the bare codec is still available, it's just listed below the payware / adware versions.
Heaven forbid that the developers might want some compensation out of their efforts.
The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
How can I use my mod points to rate this entire article 'WRONG'? :)
It's an interesting idea.
First, you get the early adopter types to use it and spread it around by offering it for free. These same people start using it to encode movies, because they're techy types.
Once it hits the mainstream, offer multiple versions -- free, so that techies can still get it and propogate it, and ad-supported, so that nontechs who want the "extra" (ie useless) features will watch the ads.
Eventually it becomes so common within the mainstream community that you feel you can lose the free version -- the techies will move on to something else, or keep using their old free version, but the established mainstream use will keep growing -- and so will the ad revenue.
I don't LIKE it, but it certainly seems to have worked. Imagine how difficult it will be to wean our nontechnical family members to a new codec... "But you said DivX was better than all the others, and I don't care about the ads!"
So something is good until someone starts trying to recoup the costs of their investments? Come on folks, get real. Codec development is costly, in addition, so is having it downloaded by millions. Perhaps if more people were willing to give back to projects they wouldn't be forced to do such.
scott
Am I right, here, people? Back me up, hah?
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Doesn't the correction make this a non-story?
======== In the future, everything will be artificial. ========
It is absolutely shameful that this was posted. It is hard to believe that /. editors couldn't even be bothered to scroll through the entire download page to see that there is still a link for the fee codec.
That being said, this does show how vulnerable we are to "bait and switch" methods. Divx has been widely adopted because it was free. If all of a sudden we DID need to pay money or have adware on our PCs to use the newer version, it would cause problems.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
The whole thing was proved incorrect anyway, so why keep it on the front page?
XViD is on the path to surpass DiVX, being rapidly developed open source.
Nothing is different for the end-user's experience. Encoding is a teenie bit more flakey than DiVX, but I'd expect it to have surpassed DiVX within a year in the quality/compression department.
Now only if we can drum up enough support to put Real and QT out of business. >:-)
http://www.xvid.org/
I'm pretty disturbed by the fact that:
I mean, I know Slashdot isn't the New York Times. I know it's fun to laugh at the lousy jobs the editors do, and the lousy job the people submitting stories do, and how awful people's spelling and grammar are, but c'mon! This is getting ridiculous.
If OSDN can't afford to hire editors, fact checkers, or anything else, try to recruit volunteers! Do it like the moderation system. Allow random users to see stories that are about to be posted and fact check them. You could have "verified true" and "verified false", then "metaverification" to keep the fact checkers honest.
I'd be happy to check the facts and the grammar of a few stories a month for free, in exchange for others doing it the rest of the time. Isn't that the whole idea of Open Source? Many eyes, few bugs? One person's effort helping thousands more?