Hardware video codecs...where are they?

[White Widow]

It seems clear to me that an affordable hardware encoding solution would provide a major boost for the future of DivX. The ability to encode high-quality video streams on the fly and decode them on systems with otherwise minimal processing power (PDA's or cell phones) would make the transition to mainstream acceptance much smoother.

Do any such hardware solutions exist? I'm sure many video technophiles would be willing to shell out an extra $50 for a hardware solution similar ot the MPEG cards of old. Indeed, if Nvidia or ATI incldued hardware MP3/MP4 encoding in their GPU's or if OEM manufacturers developed an "MP4" line of cards that had separate hardware MP4 DSP IC's on their boards, they could target a quickly growing market segment. Surely *someone* must be developing this hardware...?

 

[NicColt]

>It seems clear to me that an affordable hardware encoding solution would provide a major boost for the future of DivX

when it comes to quality and compression divx is still in the dark ages.

>affordable hardware encoding....... minimal processing power (PDA's or cell phones)

hardware encoding, is going to be for high end quality. when it comes to minimal processing and for quality and file size for pda's or cell phones software will always be the best way togo.

 

[HendrixFan]

Sigma Designs (the company that makes the H+ cards) has already announced they will use hardware DivX support on their newest cards.

http://www.sigmadesigns.com/news/press_releases/020205a.htm

Im not sure if they will be producing the chips themselves, or another company, but I read on another site that the chips will also be used for some models of standalone DVD players. It will just be a matter of time before some company decides to use the chip for both encoding and decoding on board.

 

[White Widow]

DivX may still be in the dark ages, but I challenge you to name a video standard more likely to develop in the next few years. In the same way that MP3 came on as an audio format, the DivX standard is developing now. It is a fundamental principle of competition in the technology industries that those products (or standards) that get there first reap huge "windfall" rewards even if they do not represent the "best" available technology. Look at VHS vs. Betamax or the fact that we are all still using x86 processors. It's very very hard to stop all the momentum of an installed base, and what I'm saying is that MP4 seems to be on the cusp of generating that kind of critical mass. Once companies (like Sigma) begin to commit real resources to one particular standard, they tend to protect that investment because trying to support every new "good" idea is financially unfeasable, and it appears that the market is increasingly "choosing" MP4 over the alternatives.

If this is true, then those products that make it easier to produce quality results in a minimum of time as inexpensively as possible will be financially successful while simultaneously expanding the dominance of the standard they support <whew>. Really, what alternative video compressoin standards are there that pose a serious and legitimate threat to the market that MP4 appeals to?

I agree, you're probably right about cell phones only using low-quality video streams for quite some time, but that kinda misses th point. If you're going to deliver video-2-video capabilities over wireless networks, it's far more efficient to use a custom hardware encoder than software encoding on the cell-phone's primary CPU. And what about those people with digital video cameras who want to send grandma some home footage, or more imprtantly, the business guy who wants to pack as much training video or sales promotion onto his laptop? The possibility to use MP4 as a broadband content delivery system far exceeds anything I am aware of, and similarly I know of no other format that all those DVD rippers are using. I'm not aware of a more "popular" or supported compression format than MP4 - but please let me know if I'm just off in left field playing catcher...

-A

 

[NicColt]

>but I challenge you to name a video standard more likely to develop in the next few years.

easy... MPEG 2, and Windows Media Video.

>standard more likely to develop in the next few years..... In the same way that MP3 came on as an audio format,

MP3 I admit is popular and that's what made it some sort of standard but in all honesty it's not the best audio format. The thing I like about standards is that there are always alot to choose from. I remember when Wordperfect 4.2 was a 'standard' when Ahton Tate's dBase III+ was a 'standard'. MP3 yes is here now but will eventually give way once other technologies become more open.

>the DivX standard is developing now.

Divx is by far a standard. why... because divx 3.11 is a hack, not 1 company on this planet can legally distribute copywright materials with it. Now you have Divx 5.0 and when you compare quality/file size, and when it comes to streaming media, it's no match when you compare it to Microsoft's MPEG4.

>Really, what alternative video compressoin standards are there that pose a serious and legitimate threat to the market that MP4 appeals to?

NONE, that's because companies want to retain some sort of ownership of their codecs just like divx 5.0, MPEG2 and Windows Media Video, as long as codecs remain closed with royalties it will hinder the development of a real standard. Ok I admit that divx 5.0 is open now but give it time and it will become a closed codec, meaning that you won't be able to produce copywright materials without owning some sort of licence from Divx.

>If you're going to deliver video-2-video capabilities over wireless networks, it's far more efficient to use a custom hardware encoder than software encoding

I agree, but mark my words and come back to this thread in the year 2020. no wireless vid2vid will ever work unless you have a consortium that will produce, develop and support a standard open source codec that is free and for all. No company will ever develop vid2vid with closed codecs.

 

[White Widow]

You are absolutely right that in the long run (2020 you say?) an open source codec will be necesary for any sort of "global" adoption of person to person video. And I certainly agree that digital rights management will be a critical aprt of that.

I didn't mean to imply that DivX would take over the world, but rather that as video format standards ebb and flow over the next sevreal years, it would behove SOMEONE to develop a hardware codec to support the improved use of *any* high-quality video compression technology. It still seems to me that DivX is strongly on an upswing, and it is precisely because it remains an open source technology that hardware vendors will develop hardware devices to support it and consumers will continue to utilize it. That's how MP3 developed, and it's exactly why DivX will continue to rise despite the marketing and forced inclusion of MS-MP4 in evreything. Basically, it's still free and it works increasingly well. Sigma's sure not making an MS-MP4 card...

Clearly, by developing a "Pro" version of the v5 codec the DivX guys have decided they want make a buck. I have no doubts they'd love to see DivX get huge so they can slap down a royalty-fee on everyone and get rich. At that point, something else will emerge. But I'm only talking near term here; next 1-3 years. God help us if DivX is still here in 2020.

So really, my question was (and is): don't you think it'd be smart for someone to make a hardware CODEC at all? If MS wants people to strart making and distributing home movies with MS-MP4 then maybe they'll release a hardware add-in card with USB2, firewire, and MP4 support - or something. It's the addition of the hardware support, in general, that intersts me. I find it encouraging that there's so many MPEG2 hardware options, but CDR's stil ldominate the personal removable storage market, and consequently the MP2 compression ratoi just isn't enough to make video on CDR truly viable when compared with other options. With DivX (and MP4) you could fit multiple full-length movies on a single writeable DVD disc.

I don't even know that you *CAN* build an inexpensive, and possibly low-power, hadrware CODEC for these newer formats (but something tells me it's not too hard); one that you could throw in your Celeron 800 box and get DivX encoding like you had a Dual-Xeon SMT. If you can do that then you open up a much bigger potential market...and I get to rip DVD's much easier!

-A

 

[HendrixFan]

Actually, the pro version is because the MPEG group started charging for liscensing MPEG4 technology. The adware was to pay for the royalties but not have to charge users.

In fact, Quicktime 6.0 is finished, but since it is based on MPEG4, Apple isnt releasing it. They want it to be free to end users, unless they get the Pro version. Having to pay the MPEG group for people to download Quicktime for free is a tough situation.