[MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: h264+aac in lavf mp4

[Erik Slagter]

On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 12:36 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:

> MS abadoned it in favor of patented asf/wmv/wma and even though i dont know
> i would guess that patent was the reason instead of any technical thing why
> they switched to asf
> and if you agree with the MS decission that asf is better then avi, why not
> try h264+aac in asf

For exactly the same reason. I don't care if it's better or not better
than avi. It's proprietary. End of story.

> MPEG-PS and MPEG-TS dont require PTS per frame either, just 1 PTS every 0.5
> sec or so, that in practice is even worse then avi as it doesnt help while
> it increases complexity

I must say I've become a little enthusiastic about mpeg ps/ts lately,
indeed it _is_ a real horror to seek in.

> > MP4's can encapsulate h264 and aac natively without kludges, it has
> > small overhead and seeks quick (much quicker and more accurate than ts).
> 
> .mp4 is a mess, just look at the NAL reformating issue, and .mp4 is the most
> bloated format ever designed

I didn't get the exact meaning of this. I guess you mean the h264 is
stored raw in the container while normally it has a NAL "container"? If
that's the case I would not call that that bad, only a little more
effort to implement, as with aac/adts.

> really there is no perfect container, mkv or nut might be ok everything else
> has issues

That's what I say. I use mp4 because imho it's the least "bad". And I'd
really really rather not use avi.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 2771 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/mplayer-dev-eng/attachments/20060325/4afc80fe/attachment.bin>