Hallo > > If you just want a PVR, then why not keep the recording in mjpeg form? > Something else worth mentioning here. MJPEG seems to take a lot of > CPU to decode. Using MPlayer, I constantly drop frames trying to play > an MJPEG on the same hardware that plays an MPEG2 without breaking a > sweat. That is by design that way. MPEG 1/2 was designed to need low computing power for playback. Because the DVD-Player and other devices should not need a very complex CPU which is rather expensive. A not that complex CPU produces less heat so you do not need active (FAN) cooling, which makes the video playback equipment silent, and the fan is one thing which is very likeley to fail after a few years. Which means less defect devices the companys have to worry about. And more happy customers.
MJPEG was "designed" do be a format that does not need to "much" computing power do be compressed in realtime. And to be rather small. One onther very important thing is that mjpeg was also designed to be very easy editable (MPEG ist not really editable). Two differnet requirements, two differnet formats, and in genaeral a good solution for each purpose. > I know I can use the Marvel to do hardware decoding, but AFAIK, not > simultaneously with hardware MJPEG encoding. The idea of not being > able to watch and record at the same time defeats the usefulness of a > PVR, IMHO. You should be able to watch what comes into the card at the same time on the output of the card even when recording. At least it works on the BUZ/DC10/LML33 cards. You cannot record and view a differnet stream on one card. auf hoffentlich bald, Berni the Chaos of Woodquarter Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~gz/bernhard ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Mjpeg-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
