[MEncoder-users] lavs encoding and divx compatibility

[Jakub Misak]

Stjepan Brbot <stjepan.brbot <at> zg.t-com.hr> writes:

> I know that DivX is registered TM of DivX Inc. And I know that Mencoder
> produces video files. But DivX is today almost synonym for video format.

That does not change the fact that is't completely wrong. For most people, the 
big blue "e" on their Windows desktops is a synonym for the internet. That does 
not change the fact that it's completely wrong. You don't change nonsense to a 
fact just because some people are clueless.

> When Samsung wrote that this device supported DivX it didn't mean that
> it supported DivX Inc company but video format. However thanks for your
> philosophy lamentation. 

Firstly, this is not a philosophy lamentation, this is a fact. Just using exact 
correct terms instead of fuzzy muddy nonsense. Calling AVI/MPEG-4 video "DivX" 
is exactly the same nonsense as calling the big blue "e" icon on people's 
desktops "The internet".

Then, "suporting DivX" in standalone players can mean two things. First, it 
means the player is DivX certified, which means it has right to carry the DivX 
logo, because it is certified by the DivX company to play MPEG-4 video that 
meets one of the official DivX profiles. Second, if the player is not DivX 
certified, it has no right to say it supports DivX (which, BTW, is a phrase 
that violates the DivX trademark guidelines - it can say it supports video 
encoded with DivX, which is something completely different). Some companies say 
that anyway, but of course they know it's nonsense, of course they know it 
actually means supporting MPEG-4 ASP video, but since many people are so 
confused and clueless, they decide that lying about DivX bring them more money. 
That des not make the "DivX support" claim right, it's just a business decision 
- a lie is a lie, no matter how much many it brings to Samsung.

> In mencoder documentation on Internet one can find chapter 9.3 called:
> 
> "9.3. Encoding two pass MPEG-4 ("DivX")" and statement.
> 
> Two pass encode of the second track a DVD to an MPEG-4 ("DivX") AVI
> while copying the audio track.

I know that. You said the documentation says libavcodec produces DivX encoded 
movies. No, the documentation does not say that, as you can clearly see. Please 
note that the term "DivX encoded video" means "video encoded with DivX". 
Therefore, by definition, libavcodec encoded video is not DivX encoded video, 
because libavcodec is not DivX. Just like DivX encoded video is not libavcodec 
encoded video.

What the "DivX" in the documentation means is that it is a popular (albeit 
incorrect and nonsensical) synonym for "MPEG-4". The Encoding two pass MPEG-4 
("DivX") title therefore means Encoding two pass MPEG-4 (aka "DivX"), which is 
there only for the clueless people who would not understand it without the 
"aka" bit (many people don't know what MPEG-4 is). But the MEncoder 
documentation authors know very well that MPEG-4 is not DivX, in fact, that was 
the reason why they changed the wording to this a couple of years ago, exactly 
for this reason. The discussion should still be archived somewhere.

> So we could talk about DviX this and that but this is is OK. 

We can talk about DivX only when we're talking about DivX (which is nothing 
else than a company and a trademark). When you call anything else than DivX 
"DivX", then you're not only using incorrect, nonsensical terms, but you're 
severely damaging the FFmpeg and MPlayer/MEncoder projects as well. This DivX 
nonsense (and, by extension, the failure to understand the difference between 
software products and formats) is one of the primary reasons why libavcodec has 
been ignored by the whole world for so many years despite its immense 
significance. So next time you call MPEG-4 video "DivX", please think about how 
much better MEncoder could be today if you didn't.