Talk:DivX

message: Since XSUB encoding is part of Dr.Divx, the source code for encoding it is available, and even under
LGPL:
http://drdivx.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/drdivx/DrDivX/trunk/drffmpeg/libavcodec/xsub.c?view=markup
217.233.130.129 10:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: XSUB details/how is proprietary defined in this context?

message: In section: "Quality" there is broken links:
DivX has been beaten by XviD in the 2003[1], 2004[2] and 2005[3] tests.
Those links leads to deadend --CONFIQ 15:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken links

message: It should be MPEG-4 PART 2 not LAYER 2, right?  --62.85.195.133
:I don't see either one of those phrases in the article.  --Mulligatawny 05:58, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: non-title

message: I'm removing the "compliant except for packed bitstreams" snippet because they're quite different issues. 
"Packed bitstreams" refers to the reordering and pasting-together of consecutive frames within the AVI container to work around horrible limitations in the Video for Windows decoding API.  ASP is the video compression algorithm and doesn't concern itself with in-file ordering or framing at all.
By the same token, I'm also removing the "compliant except for *.mp4 container" snippet because compliance with ASP (again, just the compression algorithm) doesn't imply compliance with the MPEG-4 container format.
Cheers.
—Ghakko 04:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Packed bitstreams 

message: There was a biased slant to the opening description, particuarly the line that compared 700MB DivX files to full-size DVDs.  I have re-written the beginning to what I believe is more neutral. -- Broken Arms Gordon 16:42, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: I came to this page looking for an explanation for what EKG is. When searching for the acronym one comes to a disambiguation page with these links
    * Electrocardiogram
    * Electrokompressiongraph
The second link just brings one to the DivX page but unfortunately the DivX article gives no explanation as to what Electrokompressiongraph is. It doesn't even mention the acronym. If someone could include an explanation to what EKG is I think it would help a lot.
--
The Electrokompressiongraph is an application used to edit multipass log files and enables the user to graphically apply biases to the data allotted to various sequences of video. Typical uses include improving quality of key scenes and reducing the bits spent encoding credits so that the encoder instead uses them to improve the picture elsewhere.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.74.219.107 (talk) 08:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a reference to the Electrokompressiongraph™ as well as the outmoded Dr.DivX where I thought was appropriate. Feel free to move it to where it needs to be. -JeebusSez 06:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  EKG 

message: Why does the fact that Gator/GAIN software was included? It's no longer included in current releases so it makes no difference! Kyle 04:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe that's the reason it should be mentioned in the article (in the History section). To make it clear that it's a part of their history and GAIN is no longer included in any DivX bundle. Some people may still think DivX includes GAIN software or other adware. J. M. 20:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality: What about it? 

message: I seem to remember a very big stink raised over how DivX asserted total control over the use of it's codec, leading to many places having to take down and/or re-encode their movies with a different codec... This should really be included as a warning to anyone seriously or even casually thinking about using this codec, not to mention the bug it places on videos encoded with it. Off the record, don't use DivX... use XviD instead so we'll all be happy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.10.142.29 (talk • contribs) 
:I don't know what you're talking about. But I know that Wikipedia articles certainly need stronger evidence than some vague statements like "I seem to remember that some people perhaps didn't like it for some reason, even though I don't remember why exactly." And helpful suggestions ("use XviD instead of DivX") also don't belong in Wikipedia articles - Wikipedia can only present objective facts, not opinions. Readers are free to think whatever they want to think about it. As for the "bug" you mention - DivX doesn't place any watermark into video it encodes. The DivX decoder adds it to the picture during playback, to inform the user that the video is being decoded with DivX. Besides, users can turn it off in preferences. --J. M. 22:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why I didn't put it in the article, I put it on the talk page. 68.10.142.29 15:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but then I don't understand why you're saying "This should really be included as a warning". When it's not clear what you're talking about, the warning is not convincing on the talk page either. --J. M. 04:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I put this here in the hopes that someone with a better memory would come along and verify this, I'm quite sure that it did happen, but I don't feel that this is requisite confidence to make an edit to the article. To elaborate, I believe the issue occured when sites offering pornographic videos were forced by the controllers of DivX to remove all videos on their sites which were encoded with the DivX codec because they didn't want their codec associated with such content. While this is entirely within their rights, I see such forced control as a reason to seek alternatives. 68.10.142.29 16:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about their other controversial antics? 

message: While DivX has long been renowned for its excellent video quality, its open-source equivalent XviD, also based on MPEG-4 Part 2, now offers comparable quality. In a series of subjective quality tests at Doom9.org, the DivX codec was beaten by XviD in the 2003, 2004, and 2005 tests.  Objective testing, however, tells a different story with DivX achieving higher ratings than XviD.
Regarding that last link, "objective testing", that's not a good test, and objective benchmarks don't prove anything anyway. I propose to delete the last sentence in the paragraph quoted above. It sounds way too final and authoritative considering it's just a link to some guy's flawed test.
I'm worried my own deletion will come across as bias, which is why I'm talking about it here instead of just deleting it straight away. I'll probably wait a week before making this edit. Snacky 22:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For something like this double-blind subjective tests are a good idea.  And good objective tests can be developed, but it requires extensive research to determine what makes something look good or bad to a human.  Note how the Q value proposed does correlate with perceived image quality.
OK, I finally deleted it. I hope people will not repeat the practice of linking to some random forum post and surrounding their link with high-falutin' text like "Objective tests, however,..." Snacky 16:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This strikes me as bias 

message: The article says "also known as MPEG-4 ASP (H.263), " but the MPEG-4_ASP page does not claim that MPEG-4 ASP is h.263. Probably, because it isn't.
--Xerces8 13:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't. H.263 is closer to MPEG-4 SP (Simple Profile), anyway, I'm going to delete it from the article. J. M. 21:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MPEG-4 ASP is not H.263 ? 

message: Does someone want to write a bit about Stage6 or even create a new article for it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Janipewter (talk • contribs) 15:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow I was just thinking about making this same request. Stage6 needs some recognition. Jv2k 02:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, Stage6 should have an article of its own, not just a redirect to DivX. Think outside the box 14:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I've just added some content to the redirect page, Stage6. Think outside the box 14:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stage6 

message: :Image:DivX logo color.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:DivX logo color.png

message: http://www.divx.com/divx/windows/author/
I think it deserves some mention here. — NRen2k5 01:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DivX Author

message: In newer versions of the Divx encoder, there is a new profile called 1080HD. Someone needs to investigate it and post the info. --Jack Zhang 11:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: need info on the new 1080HD encoding profile

message: Citation is needed on the Xvid AVC codec.  Discuss.  --KJRehberg 21:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed on the Xvid AVC codec 

message: The Early Work paragraph is not really clear:
"he Microsoft codec, which originally required that the compressed output be put in an ASF file, was altered to allow other containers such as Audio Video Interleave (AVI). Rota hacked the Microsoft codec because newer versions of the Windows Media Player wouldn't play his video portfolio and résumé that were encoded with it."
Encoded with what? Rota encoded his work with the Microsoft MPEG4 Codec as ASF and newer Media Players did not support it? Why then hack it to support AVI as well? Or did he encode his Video Portfolio with another MPEG4 Coded and the Microsoft one did not support decoding anymore?
Can someone clarify?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.69.253.115 (talk) 20:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DivX 3 History? 

message: I seem to remember that it could have stood for Digital Video exchange, but maybe it's just a whisper in my ghost. j.engelh (talk) 14:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: DivX stands for Digital Video Xtreme?  --195.60.133.246 (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, DivX is not an acronym, and definitely not for Digital Video Extreme. Anyway, that wiki page is full of nonsense, totaly clueless, it mixes codecs, formats, and just shows the author has no idea what DivX is.—J. M. (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  DivX as an acronym? 

message: Changed the intro to clearly show that DIVX was not in the business of renting special DVDs.--Atlantisv2 (talk) 14:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  DIVX by CIrcuit City was not a DVD rental system 

message: I have updated the introduction for DivX 7, but it still needs the rest done so I am going to leave the update template
I removed this text, since it didn't fit:
On the 6th of January 2009, DivX 7 was released. The MPEG-4 codec was scrapped in favour of a H.264 codec, bought from MainConcept. They moved their official file format to mkv, surpassing the restrictions of their previous format and now use AAC audio.http://investors.divx.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=357661 The DivX Converter 7 still supports DivX 6 profiles, but DivX Plus HD needs to be selected to make a DivX 7 file. When using DivX 7 in the converter the only option available is to limit filesize, but a more configurable CLI client is available from DivX Labs.http://labs.divx.com/node/6992 Since it can only create raw h.264 streams a mkv muxer must be used.
I removed this since it mentions things to do with DivX 6, maybe put back in history?
Many newer "DivX Certified" DVD players are able to play DivX encoded movies, although the Qpel and global motion compensation features are often omitted to reduce processing requirements. They are also excluded from the base DivX encoding profiles for compatibility reasons.
keeperofdakeys 09:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Introduction 

message: This is my explanation why I reverted FleetCommand's edits. Saying that "A variety of formats" is weasel wording is based on total misunderstanding or misinterpreting the Avoid weasel words guideline. Let me quote the definition:
"On Wikipedia, the term refers to evasive, ambiguous or misleading attribution."
Attribution is the problem. The only problem. Everything else just follows:
"Weasel words do not really give a neutral point of view; they just spread hearsay, or couch personal opinion in vague, indirect syntax. It is better to put a name to an opinion by citing sources which are reliable than it is to assign it to an anonymous or vague-to-the-point-of-being-meaningless "source" which is unverifiable."
In other words, the "Avoid weasel words" guideline (please note that it is a style guideline, not a rule or a policy, so FleetCommand's argument that "weasel words are not allowed in Wikipedia" is wrong even if the article actually contained weasel words—what is or is not allowed is described in the policies, not in the guidelines) deals with something completely different. The "Avoid weasel words" policy only deals with two things: attribution and neutrality, which are the basic rules that Wikipedia follows, namely in the verifiability and neutral point of view policies (please note that these are actual policies, not style guidelines). Therefore, weasel words violate the neutral point of view and verifiability policies.
This is all explained in the Avoid weasel words guideline. All of the examples mentioned there deal with improper attribution:
"Some people say..."
"Contrary to many..."
"...is claimed to be..."
"Some feel that..."
and so on.
All these examples demonstrate the attributability problem: Who says that? How many people? Where? When?
That's the problem with weasel words. Weasel words are unsuccessful attempts to make judgements or opinions look neutral. Instead of saying "The DivX Plus Player can play files in an exceptional number of formats", it can be changed to "The DivX Plus Player can play files in a number of formats that is considered exceptional by some people". That would be weasel wording, i.e. masking opinions as neutral statements: By whom? Where? Give me links.
On the other hand, arguing that "The DivX Plus Player has native support for playback of files in a variety of formats" is weasel wording is just plain nonsense. That sentence does not violate the verifiability or neutral point of view policies in any way. Instead of listing all formats the software supports (which is not necessarily within the scope of the article, an encyclopedic article does not have to list all technical details, it can just provide a reasonable overview), it just says it supports multiple formats. Which is an uncontroversial fact that is very unlikely to ever be challenged.
Saying "it can do it in a variety of ways" instead of saying "it can do it like this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this" is just a general concept that's perfectly legal to use on Wikipedia, often improves readability (it is not necessary to list all technical details in a long list, which is also explained in the WP:NOT policy), and is therefore widely used in an extremely large number of articles. For example:
"Formal bonsai containers are ceramic pots, which come in a variety of shapes and colors" (Bonsai: "a variety of shapes and colors" is, by FleetCommand's logic, weasel wording, because the sentence does not say which shapes and colours exactly they are.)
"The ability to sense infrared thermal radiation evolved independently in several different families of snakes" (Infrared sensing in snakes: By FleetCommand's logic, the expression "in several different families of snakes" is weasel wording, because it does not list the families of snakes that can sense infrared thermal radiation.)
"Rain-Blo is a brand of bubble gum that come in a variety of fruit flavors" (Rain-Blo: Instead of listing all flavours the bubble gum comes in, it just says it comes in multiple flavours, which, according to FleetCommand, only weasels do.)
"He played in a variety of local clubs, most notably the Hummingbird." (John Hiatt: Instead of listing all local clubs he played in during his early years, the sections only mentions Hummingbird as an example. FleetCommand considers this forbidden, because "in a variety of local clubs" is weasel wording, "Early life and career" sections must list all local clubs young artists played in.)
"Later, she started to take part in various talent shows and received laudable recognition.[1]" (Anette Olzon: instead of listing all talents shows she took part in, it just includes a reference, just like the DivX article. According to FleetCommand's logic, this is forbidden, because all sentences on Wikipedia must list all details to avoid violating the weasel words guideline.)
And so on and so on. I hope it is quite clear by now. So, to avoid edit warring, please do not revert the edit again with bogus reasoning, and do not revert it in 4 steps with 3 empty "edits" to make it more difficult to revert. This is not how a well-behaving Wikpiedia editor should act. Thank you.—J. M. (talk) 07:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel words 

message: Four month ago  proposed DivX Plus HD to be merged into this article. Until now, there was no appropriate mirroring tag on this article to alert everyone in this page of the merger. I have mirrored the tag.
Now, as for the merger proposition, please share your thoughts. Should this merger be carried out? Please note that your silence in this matter may be regarded per Wikipedia:Silence and consensus.
Regards, Fleet Command (talk) 07:35, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote it SHOULD NOT be merged, due to the growing length of this root DivX article, and I believe the DivX Plus HD article allows for more details around the technologies related to the topic, including hardware, chipsets, and compatible technologies (e.g. x264).  Porfitron (talk) 20:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Me too. I believe Toehead2001 is not so keen on the merger either (judging by the fact he has not yet acted.) Removing merger tag now. Fleet Command (talk) 12:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger discussion 

message: I redirected DX50 to DivX as it is the FourCC code for DivX 5.0. Treylander 20:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[DX50]] 

message: Apologies if I am being thick, but I don't understand the History section:
"In early 2000, Jordan Greenhall recruited Rota to form a company (originally called DivXNetworks, Inc., renamed to DivX, Inc. in 2005)"
"In early 2001 ... the project forked. That summer, Rota left the French Riviera and moved to San Diego "with nothing but a pack of cigarettes" where he and Greenhall founded what would eventually become DivX, Inc."
Was this company formed in early 2000 in a place unspecified, or in summer 2001 in San Diego?  JominyDave (talk) 04:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous history 

message: Containers have nothing to do with raw encoded streams. Raw streams can be contained within containers such as Matroska or MPEG-4 Part 14, but there is no requirement for this. Random2001 (talk) 13:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess you are right. Fleet Command (talk) 09:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Containers Versus Streams 

message: The opening content includes "This article is about the video codec" but the Table of Contents reveals that the article is about many other things also.
180.200.146.146 (talk) 23:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading Introduction 

message: Any base details about the video compression algorithm.2A02:8422:1191:6E00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 10:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The DivX codec uses standard MPEG-4 Part 2 and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC compression (it does not have its own video compression format). You can read about the MPEG-4 compression elsewhere. Of course, the exact algorithm the DivX encoder uses (to create the MPEG-4 video) is known only to the DivX developers, as it is a proprietary, closed-source product.—J. M. (talk) 04:51, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does it works 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on DivX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pcworld.com/article/125772-7/the_25_worst_tech_products_of_all_time.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/personality/elle/20071130-systemupdate.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on DivX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130207061843/http://labs.divx.com/divx-plus to http://labs.divx.com/divx-plus
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100326233349/http://investors.divx.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=357661 to http://investors.divx.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=357661
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080223010804/http://www.doom9.org/codec-comparisons.htm to http://www.doom9.org/codec-comparisons.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on DivX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20021215232639/http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/03/15/divx_part1/index.html to http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/03/15/divx_part1/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101118150800/http://labs.divx.com/node/14711 to http://labs.divx.com/node/14711
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110925195012/http://labs.divx.com/divx-plus-web-player-hiq to http://labs.divx.com/divx-plus-web-player-hiq
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:37, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect DX50. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Paul_012 (talk) 08:54, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "DX50" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]