Support and General Use > Plugins/Viewers

AVI playback

<< < (3/11) > >>

safetydan:
Those are also not going to happen on most targets. Way too CPU intensive.

Llorean:
You really have a choice:

Speed
Filesize
Quality.

You get two of the three. With MPEG2 you can sacrifice filesize and possibly a bit of speed for quality. With MPEG-4 codecs you can't really sacrifice anything to gain back the speed you lose from it being more complex.

markun:

--- Quote from: Chronon on November 29, 2007, 02:28:55 PM ---If you're talking about h.264 or AVC, then this will not be feasible on the current targets.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: grossaffe on November 29, 2007, 06:03:27 PM ---i was thinking more along the lines of DivX, XviD, and MPEG-4

--- End quote ---

h.264/AVC is part of MEPG-4 (part 10)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

But I guess you are talking about support for MPEG-4 part 2:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_2

grossaffe:
i wasn't talking about the mp4 container, i was talking about the mpeg-4 option within the container.  but either way, i guess its too hardware intensive.  oh well, one can dream... or i guess i could also upgrade to a view... after it gets a rockbox port ;)

cpchan:

--- Quote from: grossaffe on November 29, 2007, 06:03:27 PM ---i was thinking more along the lines of DivX, XviD, and MPEG-4

--- End quote ---

DivX and XviD are MPEG4 implementations.


--- Quote from: safetydan on November 29, 2007, 06:08:52 PM ---Those are also not going to happen on most targets. Way too CPU intensive.

--- End quote ---

I guess the Gigabeat is the only target with enough horse power to decode it in software. However, I believe there might be some targets with DIVX/XVID hardware decoding- it might be feasable on these, but the hardware needs to be figured out.

Charles


Charles

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version