No favorite files added yet
1.9.0 (Aug 16, 2001)
To masoud, Cron0, xertius: GDiVX has been rereleased (under the same version number) to fix this SubMain error that affects some people. FileForum has yet to update theyr executable. Please visit www.gdivx.com and redownload the player, this will fix the error. MediaPlayer 7 may have been coded in C, but the simple fact is it is a bloated, memory hungry, cpu hogging program. Ever tried to play a divx on a K6-2-450 with WiMP 7? Good luck to you .. Tried it with GDiVX? Hrm.. surprise .. it plays fine .. VB Can indeed create applications in many arenas that stand up to most other languages. Arguing about what language is good and what isnt is futile. The Simple fact of teh matter is performance of the compiled, finsihed product. GDiVX *DOES* Outperform WiMP by miles, Runs well on low end machines and enables people to play divx that previously couldnt. cron0, my appologies regarding the fonts, this is still being worked on. Mind you, i run my screen (19 inch) in 1600x1200 with standard fonts and dont have a problem.. keep an eye on future versions, this will be fixed eventually. masoud, you should be a little more specific than that. This app was developed in windows 2000, so its not a win2k compatiblity issue. If it is the submain problem, read above for a solution ..
8/18/00 (Aug 24, 2000)
dude, is it just me, or is that my code?
windows users just dont get the idea of open source do they. Open source != a free right to use teh code to your own ends
at the very least you ask permission dammit. Did you do anything besides move the buttons? christ. its like.. identical ...
1.7.0 (Aug 4, 2000)
now ok, this seems a silly place to put a comment about my own program, but so be it, in my testing, the program uses notably less cpu than wmp 6.4 and definitly less than 7 .. iv tested it both on windows 2000, and windows 98. on my system (celeron 500, banshee) wmp 6.4 uses around 60% cpu to play a divx, and the gdivx player averages around 30%. I have had reports of the player, under win2k, sitting up on full,or close to full, cpu useage, but iv been unable to duplicate that on my systems. The point im making tho, is its not a false claim. it was designed to be faster, and in my tests, and a large number of reported cases, it is faster. i have recieved thank you mails from many people on low end k6 systems that cant play divx in wmp at all, becuase it skips too much, but the gdivx player can, due to less cpu useage. Im sorry if it doesnt perform on your system, but the point is, i didnt lie about its features or abilities, the program does, in most cases, out perform wmp.
0.3 (Jun 13, 2000)
from what iv been reading, this feature is actually implemented in windows 2000 by the OS itself, as part of its memory management system. win2k certainly does seem to handle memory far better than win9x and even nt4, which may account to this?
.23 (Jun 11, 2000)
Terribly sorry for the missleading description. I copy and pasted it from a notepad in which i composed it, and promptly managed to cut off the first sentence. As for teh ocx required, this will be packaged with future release, i had clean forgotten all about it. for teh meantime, it can be downloaded from of charge from www.socketwrench.com -- Thanks for the feedback, Michael Saunders
.23 (Dec 2, 2000 - 12:31 AM)
3ivx sent out a press release the other day annoucing a set date for release (december 15th) and information on teh codec. The other main problem here is that 3ivx is *NOT* based on divx. its based on the original mpeg4 spec, so as not to be using microsoft propetiry code. Whether or not it lives up to its compression/quality claims remains to be seen. and yes, in my opinion, project mayo will offer superioir quality, but again, remains to be seen. the full press release that was emailed out is avaialble to read on www.vcdguide.com when the mysql issues are resolved.
.23 (Jul 13, 2000 - 2:38 PM)
i think there is a very good point here. microsoft want to have theyr new os widely used, and i think for something like this to work (and if/when it does, it will be brilliant), they need not only developer support, but USER support as well. and ok, there are a lot of people with cable/dsl or other broardband connections in the us, and many more with it available to them, but theres a LOT more still that cant get it. And thats just the US. Im personally from australia, try to find broadband outside of a capital city here. good luck. the same would go for many countries. microsoft has to consider this.. i think the idea is good, but.. perhaps too early. who knows