On 3/1/07, Zvi Devir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry for jumping ahead, but this something I really don't understand. Let's assume that there are currently a few valid US patents on JPEG, MJPEG (There are probably more) as well as for MPEG4.2 (xvid divx wmv1 and many more are MPEG4 part 2 implementations). My question is, so what? A patent is a territorial legal being -- it is valid only where it was granted. Even if JPEG is covered by hundreds of active US patents, and some unenforceable EU patents, it has nothing to do with countries in which the OLPCs will be distributed, since those patents are invalid there. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, February 27, 2007 19:46, José Antonio wrote: >> What about Xvid? It is open source and is the better codec in CPU >> resources >> use and quality... > > Well, if you are going to use patented codecs, why not just use x264. It's > better quality than xvid. x264 requires more computation power for decoding compared to xvid.
Yes, Xvid requires half computation than any other codec, in my experiences. (using Windows XP, ffdshow+Xvid, Sempron 2800+, mostly to record TV in real time). With any other codec I reach 100% of frame grab, 640x480, 29,97 fps, RGB, deinterlacing, with 60% of CPU time. Benjamin Franklin was right: patents sux! -- nome: "José Antonio Meira da Rocha" tratamento: "Prof. MS." atividade: "Pesquisa e aprendizado em mídias digitais" googletalk: email: MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 658222 Skype: "meiradarocha_jor" veículos: [ http://meiradarocha.jor.br http://olpcitizen.blogspot.com ]
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
