[MPlayer-users] Re: Quicktime: "No 'moov' atom could be found"

Ken kmartinek at ascentmedia.com
Fri Aug 29 18:46:11 CEST 2003

The only thing that makes me hestitant to condone MPEG4 is their 
licensing 'fees'. And yes its container is more complicated than AVI, 
but thats because of its Object container support - this turns out to be 
REALLY cool though since ancillary data and media can be carried with 
the file (captions, images, files, chapter lists, etc.).

But it has some undeniable advantages.

-Its currently the only format that could be played in all three of the 
'big three' players (Real, WM, QT) (or at least that they will all (have 
to) agree on despite having a proprietary alternative that they want to 
-It has hardware-decode chipsets in production ; being built into new 
dvd players and set-top cable boxes, video conferencing products, etc.
-It has hardware-encode chipsets in production; being built into new 
camcorders, transcoders (DV->Mpeg4), etc.
-It works on every streaming server I've seen - including the open 
source ones.
-All the large multimedia companies are building SDKs that can edit 
and/or create interactive content for it.

Also, I believe 'divx' supports creating the 'compliant' container, and 
maybe ffmeg? mpeg4ip definately does, and of course apple.

It seem to me that mp4 has way more momentum/interoperability than any 
other propritary container...

Erik Slagter wrote:

> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]
>>AVI has its problems, but MPEG program streams are much more limited in 
>>what they can contain. I've never heard of anyone putting MPEG-4 video 
>>in them. What I've wondered is why there isn't more interest in using 
>>Quicktime or its derivative, the MPEG-4 container. Those certainly have 
>>their detractors, but Quicktime seems to be quite flexible and capable. 
>>Of course there's also Matroska, which seems to be based on sound 
>>principles and planning, but it's largely unknown and will probably 
>>remain that way for quite a while.
> The common opinion (at least on this list) seems to be that MP4 (the
> file format) sucks, apparently because it is derived from Quicktime.
> Apparently that is enough reason to stick with a broken, proprietary
> format.
> Anyway everytime it bring this up people laugh at me, so I gave up.

More information about the MPlayer-users mailing list