Reviews of DivX Codec for Windows

1. 
   ryan858

   Reviewing 6.7 Beta 1 (Jul 29, 2008)

   Divx is just ripoff trialware like the above reviewers say. Xvid is honestly a better codec, and not to mention it came first.
   
   Look at the names. Xvid, Divx. Divx is just Xvid spelled backwards. And it's not the other way, because does "Divx" make any sense? No, but Xvid does. Xvid sounds like a video codec. That's why they named it that. Divx just copied the great codec, modified it a bit (for the worse, in my opinion), flipped the name around, and made people pay for it. It’s the unreliable, poor quality, shady, pay-for version of Xvid.
   
   It's hardly even a good marketing tactic. I mean who would honestly PAY FOR divx, when you can get Xvid for FREE. Apparently they fooled some people though, or they'd be out of business, so for that, I'll give them a 2. Good job, Divx!
2. 
   photonboy

   Reviewing 6.7 Beta 1 (Aug 27, 2007)

   When I saw "format conversion" I expected something more than what I got. However, some Divx points:
   
   1) This new version continues HD support. I'm not really sure where Divx HD is going. There's really no futuer in Divx HD. Everything's going AVC. The people that have the expertise to "backup" their BluRay and HD-DVD files are using AVC. Also, for digital hand-held video players it's all about AVC.
   
   If I want to back-up High-Def I wouldn't use Divx HD. It's possible that Divx is hoping to gain Divx HD DVD Player sales from BluRay or HD-DVD rips. Not likely, since people will buy these machines, and, if they do use illegal copies, it'll be AVC that their machines already can decode.
   
   2) Xvid and Divx are really no different on paper. There is a "Home Theater" standard for standalone Divx DVD Players. Since the standards are set, they have fiddled around with tweaking to improve quality, but both are limited by the existing standards. (again, AVC blows Divx/Xvid away)
   
   3) Maybe not a Divx standard, but rather an AVI one (AVI's is the Container used for compatibility with Divx DVD players. Other containers like Matroska can do Anamorphic but only work on your computer), there's no Anamorphic support so when you backup you automatically lose quality. (You lose 25% to be exact, before the losses due to converting to Divx from MPEG2.)
   
   I've looked at the latest encoder. I could write more, but quite frankly where is Divx heading? A history lesson reveals stores with Divx-only discs players in stores which were shortly thereafter displaced by DVD-VIDEO.
   
   Divx saw a resurgence driven almost entirely by the illegal ripping and uploading of DVD-Video Movies and TV Series as well as broadcast video. The Divx DVD Players are almost entirely used to play back this content. Because of the Internet, downloading PAL and NTSC content (as both AVI and DVD-Video) was so intermixed that most machines play both formats. Heck, you can't even play a PAL DVD here normally because it has a different Region Code.
   
   Even though Divx was seeing some profit due to this they made no effort to play back the video properly on the most used screen, the CRT TV. (see: square vs non-square) so video is always slightly stretched to the vertical. Not to mention the choice of AVI with its lack of Anamorphic support, they existed SOLELY due to a lack of other options.
   
   Enter AVC.
   AVC (aka H264/MPEG-4) is one of 3 video formats for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. If you truly want to back up your DVD collection, I'd wait and legally rip to a BluRay or HD-DVD disc when prices make it feasible. Properly done, losses should be minimal with roughly 1/3rd of the size depending on what is removed. It's a lot of work though. If Dual-Layer discs where cheaper I'd just backup that way. DVD5 aka single layer, is currently cheaper than CD's which only hold 700MB versus 4400MB for DVD5. DVD9 aka dual layer (what 99% of DVD's are recorded to) are much more money due to supply and demand. So, my future backup of my collection will be determined by disc costs and time involved. (another option will be using a hard drive based media server. With 1000GB hard drives now available which hold roughly 130 uncompressed, standard DVD's this may be a better way. Tough choices, but Divx isn't on my list here anywhere. I can see myself converting my TV series like "X-Files" to AVC for my future BluRay laptop. I see both hard drive "full" DVD backups and AVC compressions happening.)
   
   Video Divx?
   So Divx, to its "credit" is trying to expand and ride the new Internet video craze (which is likely to be here forever). But what is Divx's game plan? If I'm going to use Divx I need to know there's a future for it.
   
   Divx DVD players will fade away to be replaced by AVC equivalents. It's not the best codec around. It's "okay" but it's limited by its existing standards. It can't improve video quality without ceasing to exist. There's simply no future for Divx.
   
   Like many people I thought about backing up my DVD collections to Divx or XVid. When I realized how much quality is lost it became a non-issue.
   
   Divx has most likely hit its peak and will begin to fade away. You'll be able to judge this by the number of Divx DVD players. I don't expect it to disappear over night but the writings on the wall.
3. 
   radiomaffia

   Reviewing 6.7 Beta 1 (Aug 24, 2007)

   DivX has made one mistake!DrDivx was first shareware and the crowd begain to discover Xvid and then it was allready too late for DrDivX when they suddenly turned DrDivx into open source software.
   Xvid is also better with compressing, I allways use the the Video Bitrate Calculator 1.0 from weethet.nl before I start by the way. DivX is history for me and every thing sticked to it(included the PlaYa), sorry!
4. 
   improvelence

   Reviewing 6.7 Beta 1 (Aug 24, 2007)

   Complete crap, doesnt give you any advantage over FFDSHOW, plus any system with NERO installed can use their included codec to play any Divx Mpeg-4 file anyhow. Do not install this skank-ware.
5. 
   Latz !

   Reviewing 6.7 Beta 1 (Aug 24, 2007)

   Proprietary crap, use xvid instead (until the FAR superior *.264 codec is more widely supported.

Discuss DivX Codec for Windows

No comments yet