Forum Archive Home -> Latest Video News -> Security update for Xvid
Security update for Xvid | ||||
| TBoneit posted 2009 May 30 11:50 | ||||
| "30 May 2009, 13:37
Security update for Xvid The Xvid developers have released version 1.2.2 of their MPEG-4 codec to fix three security-related issues. One of the flaws reportedly prevents a function of the xvidcore library from checking the resync marker range correctly. In its short announcement, Xvid Solutions do not mention whether the flaws can be exploited for injecting code via specially crafted videos. Snip...... http://www.xvid.org/News.64.0.html?&cHash=0170b4e439&tx_t ... tt_news]=7 " From Here: http://www.h-online.com/security/Security-update-for-Xvid--/news/113415 | ||||
| Wolfen posted 2009 Jun 03 01:07 | ||||
| With the advances in HD, avc/H264, and MKV. Xvid, Divx and avi are going the way of the dinosaur. | ||||
| oldfart13 posted 2009 Jun 03 02:03 | ||||
| It would be a pointless waste of my time to convert my VHS tape collection into High Definition MKVs. Xvid will do just fine.... | ||||
| Wolfen posted 2009 Jun 03 02:17 | ||||
| If I were you I wouldn't, it would take too long and the quality isn't worth the time. It is easier to just go and try and rent the movies from blockbuster, really. | ||||
| sambat posted 2009 Jun 03 04:56 | ||||
| The chances of Blockbuster having any of my VHS tapes (on DVD) is risible. | ||||
| jagabo posted 2009 Jun 03 07:35 | ||||
How many DVD players play h.264 in MKV? | ||||
| oldfart13 posted 2009 Jun 03 08:08 | ||||
| Only the LG390 that I know of and it isn't available (yet) in Canada. Outrageously priced as well.... | ||||
| jman98 posted 2009 Jun 03 09:42 | ||||
You have MUCH to learn, grasshopper. For starters, see jagabo's reply to your post. That pretty much sums it up. Also, do you predict the immediate death of MP3 because superior alternatives exist? How about the death of low tech VCD? I hate to break it to you, but VCD is still alive and well. The fact that superior quality alternatives exist to Xvid/Divx in now way means the end of these codecs. The point of using Xvid or Divx is NOT that people still think it is the best. The point of using it is that it serves a lowest common denominator value of providing good quality and small file size plus being able to be played on a variety of playback devices. AVC/H.264 can't be played back very well on older PCs or the vast majority of DVD players available. | ||||
| ron spencer posted 2009 Jun 03 10:28 | ||||
| xvid, divx, and dvd ISO are still king. X264 needs monster processor to get stuff done in same time as xvid. If you go to higher file sizes (1.5 gig), xvid can look just as good as dvd on 50" plasma. Great for file servers, etc.
xvid and divx are not going anywhere...in fact, given how slow x264 encodes on most machines (most people run simpler more budget systems), I think xvid and divx popularity has gone up. In a few years when everyone has an i7 then maybe....but for the foreseeable future, divx and xvid are here to stay...they just play on anything | ||||
| SatStorm posted 2009 Jun 03 12:08 | ||||
| I never liked xvid-divx, but I do like H264.
It's a matter of time before H264 turn king. The DVB broadcasts use H264, BluRay use H264, cell phones use H264, multimedia players use H264. It is the "mp3" of video, while XviD/DivX are the "mp2" of video. Of course, we need top notch PCs with H264. Eventually we gonna have them. Regarding VHS, I prefer convert them to H264 than DivX/XviD. Soon or later, I gonna get a BluRay Standalone and I'll be able to playback those files from there. Of course, it is nice to see XviD being updated. There will always be uses for that codec, same way we still use - occasionally - vcd and mpeg1. | ||||
| z0mbie posted 2009 Jun 03 13:53 | ||||
| It's interesting to see people actualy having totaly opposite views between Xvid & H264, I my self say that XviD will still live on for years to come, I think there are to many divx/xvid stand alone players out there now to stop it, almost every second DVD player these days plays divx | ||||
| SatStorm posted 2009 Jun 03 14:03 | ||||
| XviD/DivX gonna stay in the scene for many more years, just like mpeg 1 and 2!
But, H264 has a brighter future overall and technically speaking, I truly believe that it is a better codec than XviD/DivX. | ||||
| ron spencer posted 2009 Jun 03 16:06 | ||||
| x264/H264 just gives you same quality at smaller bitrate...just increase the filesize (and thus bitrate) in xvid and it is the same for all intents and purposes. H264 is not a sea change in terms of quality...although if you refer to BR specs of super high bitrates then yes it is better...but for backups like xvid was intended for then there really is no difference. | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 06 20:20 | ||||
| When standalone players capable of x264/h264/mkv are common then xvid may be dead (dead as in "VCD is dead" today - not really dead, just not as common as in the past).
Current number of such standalone players seen in retail stores as of June 2009: ZERO
You Sir, are a genuine moron. | ||||
| Ally68 posted 2009 Jun 06 20:54 | ||||
| True, there aren't many standalone players that support H.264. But the quality is still better, and is improving greatly with x264 updates. Players may not support it now, but they will. That's a promise. | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 06 21:22 | ||||
Of course quality is better, every newer format always improves on previous ones (well, usually). And if the newer format becomes popular enough, syandalone players capable of playing it will follow. We all know that. But that's not the point. Point is xvid is still #2 (after MPEG-2) on the market, and it is far far far away from being dead :) (and no, I'm not xvid fanboy, I don't even like xvid/divx/mp4/etc and myself i don't use this crap at all) | ||||
| jagabo posted 2009 Jun 06 21:35 | ||||
Everything goes that way eventually. | ||||
| SatStorm posted 2009 Jun 06 23:12 | ||||
| Actually, the hot thing today, is not the standalone disc players, but standalone media players. Especially those nmt solutions (WDTV, PopCorn Hour, eGrate, etc). Since I got my Popcorn Hour, I use much less my DVD standalone player.
Those standalone media players already play mkv / mp4 / H264. Actually, they base their success on this specific fact: They support mkv! Also, don't forget cell phones: Many of them can playback H264. The new trend (which I do it myself) is use them as playback H264 devices and connect them on TVs. You don't have quality, but it is for uses you don't care about quality. Younger people today use more and more those alternatives. All those devices of course, playback also XviD. But I don't know someone that have then and still choose xvid over h264.... | ||||
| raffie posted 2009 Jun 07 05:22 | ||||
| XviD isn't dead just yet, and the reason are simple; standalone DVD players today don't support mkv/x264 yet, so groups still realease in XviD mostly.
However, since DivX7 now fully supports mkv/x264 playback, it's only a matter of time when DivX7 certified players will appear on the market, and the only reason they haven't yet, is because they would logically also have to support 1080p, and that would require more processing power (and so more expensive player) just for playing Hi-Def files. Whant I can predict with 99% certainty tho, is that not so long from now, Xvid will have disappeared overnight. You will wake up and x264 will have taken over. I give it 12 months. | ||||
| Ally68 posted 2009 Jun 07 09:39 | ||||
| I agree with SatStorm, media players are taking over disc players.
Give it a year, and everything will support H.264 | ||||
| vhelp posted 2009 Jun 07 19:07 | ||||
| ahh, copy pop, that's what it is.
I agree. In fact, all i've been doing lately is using 8gig mem sticks since I got mine. I can't even look back to discs, w/ exceptions of course--archving or copying a file for a friend for instance. I have to do that this week. Geesh, I hope I can remember how to burn a disc :lol: -vhelp 5138 | ||||
| zenzen1 posted 2009 Jun 07 20:53 | ||||
| Agree totally with Satstorm....DVDs are so last century !!
I have transferred all my DVDs onto my MediaPlayers. I have a Popcorn and a WDTV unit. Both have 1.5Tb HDDs hanging off them (as well as a 1.5tb internal on the Popcorn). Some of my DVDs are in ISO format. Most of the rest are in Xvid format (doccos from cable TV, etc). Have just started playing and converting into MKV and am amazed at the vid quality compared to file size (typically one third of the original size, with no visual loss of quality on a 46" plasma). Not to mention the convenience of simply selecting something to watch from a menu list. No need to find the DVD disc, put it in the player, and remove it when the movie has finished. LOVE IT !!!!!! | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 07 22:40 | ||||
Yes, but if there were no discs where do you copy your stuff from? Capture packets from HDTV broadcast? Sure thats an option, but maybe 1 in a 1000000 people know how to do it. Its bullshit. You need source (discs) to copy it in any format to your "Network Media Player" or whatever memory card. Last time I checked the studios released only DISCS ;) (unless you only rely on torrents and other p2p ways...) | ||||
| zenzen1 posted 2009 Jun 08 00:40 | ||||
| Your missing my point dereX888. Sure we still use DVDs. All my movies and docco vids are archived on DVD because HDDs connected to Media Players are not 100% fail proof.
I was simply pointing out the convenience of Media Players over DVD players, and the rapid progression of I.T. in general. Once I stored my music on C90 cassette tapes, then on CD discs, now on MP3 media players. Once I stored my video on VHS tape, then on DVD discs, now on a Media Player as MKV, AVI, Mpeg2, ISO or whatever format they provide. They also play music and display pictures, all with the convenience of NOT having to search for, load, play, then put them away again. YMMV.....Whatever floats your boat :) | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 08 02:09 | ||||
Well, in that regard I got "tired" of discs as well, Im using Windows 2000-based PC as my home "network media center" for almost 10 years already, I only swap HDDs for larger and larger every while... with blazing fast wired home network I don't have problem streaming any music or videos in any format from that machine, my only wish is to have gigabit wireless home network ;) My point was that majority (and I mean real majority, like 99% probably) of people in the world don't use PCs for watching movies. They use standalone players, even though it is not even remotely as convenient as having a "central media server" at home, connected to all your devices. Its not even possible since most of standalone devices are NOT connectable or very limited (DRM-infected and other junk, which most of people have no clue how to get rid of, or even how to connect them). Hence it'll be long time until discs disappear from our daily lives. As for whatever newer formats - that's only matter of time until manufacturers incorporate ability to play them on their standalone *disc-playing* devices. I have no doubt xvid will be gone once any newer format is included in standalone devices by mass-manufacturers. But until then xvid rules, discs rule, and only bunch of geeks like you or me, on boards like this, can be proud of being "disc-free" or "fully HD -media networked" etc. You are in a geek niche, face the facts :lol: OTOH what I would welcome with open arms is some open-source universal video network protocol that would work like some overlay layer on existing protocols, so you don't need 1000 codecs and software players to playback any video from one device to another, in the fashion of how it worked with i.e. old analog outputs thru RCA: no matter the source was it VHS, DAT, CD, cassette player, VHS-C camcorder, Betamax, DV, DVD player - it always came out as same analog audio and video signals that any other device with same RCA input could "understand", Truly ubiquitus and universal. I want same thing, only in digital version, if you follow me. That would be something that would truly revolutionize our world, wouldn't it? ;) (of course not that it will ever happen, not unless all greedy studios, MPAAs and RIAAs of the world are gone first) | ||||
| zenzen1 posted 2009 Jun 08 03:10 | ||||
| What you say makes a lot of sense. Maybe in my original post I should have said "DVD Players are so last century".
But even that is "tongue in-Cheek" because, as you say....."My point was that majority (and I mean real majority, like 99% probably) of people in the world don't use PCs for watching movies." Good point, and an underlying meaning in my originial post was to generate some interest and inspire more people to check out Media Players (or streaming video from PC's) as an alternative. Most of my friends are in "the majority", and when they visit here, and I switch on the plasma and display a menu with say, video music doccos, and their jaw drops at seeing the selection available at the press of a button :) | ||||
| Ai Haibara posted 2009 Jun 08 04:58 | ||||
| I don't know... when the players are available for ~$60 or so at a local Wal-Mart, Target or equivalent store, then they'll start to take off. :) | ||||
| SatStorm posted 2009 Jun 08 06:12 | ||||
| Well, WDTV costs 89 euros right now. It has the same price as a "good" DVD Standalone player. | ||||
| ron spencer posted 2009 Jun 08 06:15 | ||||
| It is MORE than just having standalones able to play the stuff...people oin this board are power users. The average person is not, so they are not lilkely to upgrade their machines as often. Only when most peopl have machines fast enough to encode h264 as quick as xvid will this thing truly take off. Right now, alot of h264 encodes can take forever on a slower machine. So the average person will not go fo this.
You need encoding speed (which xvid has) and standalones....when will this be true for the AVERAGE person? | ||||
| SatStorm posted 2009 Jun 08 06:27 | ||||
| Very soon, but not because of the encoding...
You see, DVB S2 and T2 broadcasts, are based on H264. PVRs, PC cards, etc, are already here. Some use them. Linux receivers with ethernet ports also can be used for this. Those solutions grab direct the stream and store it on your PC (or HDD). So, for us in Europe, it's gonna be very mainstream soon. Also, cellphones: The later use H264. Also, cheap video cameras / photo cameras. They shoot to H264 variations. People wish to watch all this on TVs. Now. DVD Standalones don't adapt fast enough with those needs. Media Standalone Players do. All those using something from the above, soon or later buy one of them and watch using HDD, USB Sticks or even home LANs. | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 11 06:42 | ||||
I wanted to ask earlier, somehow I forgot. Why do you need any of those? (popcorn hour, egrate - whatever they are I don't know, I'm just assuming they are some network streaming proprietary apps). You don't need any special software or special "media players". Playing files stored on one networked device to another one (PC-> PC) always worked even in the Windows 95 times... I'm always laughing at all idiots buying i.e. "Windows Home Server" or such garbage, like they are so dumb that they never knew they can set shared video folder or drive or even entire computer on their home network (and do so completely without any DRM-infection whatsoever) and watch files from one computer on another one... or like they wouldn't have Task Scheduler in every Windoze to set scheduled backups... They need WMP to scan all networked computers for shared audiovideo files for them, because theyre too stupid to do it manually? Too lazy to click 3 times? I don't know. | ||||
| jagabo posted 2009 Jun 11 07:26 | ||||
Because they are watching on TV, not a computer. Buying a computer to watch video on TV will cost several hundred dollars. The WDTV costs about $100 and maybe another $100 for a USB hard drive. The Popcorn hour can access their home network shares directly via wired or wireless networking. (Actually, so can the WDTV with mod firmware and a USB network adapter.) | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 11 08:02 | ||||
Thx for explanation, but FYI: you don't need multi-core gazillion gigabyter box with multiple videocards to be able to hook it up to tv and watch videos! | ||||
| RabidDog posted 2009 Jun 11 08:19 | ||||
| Xvid encode (on say C2D 2.6) approx 1-1.5x real time (1.5gb)
X264 encode (on say C2D 2.6) approx 6x real-time (1.0gb)++ Not worth the extra time. IMO. Plus if somebody wants to borrow it :?: God, I hate those Fake Morons even more :P | ||||
| SatStorm posted 2009 Jun 11 11:07 | ||||
| DereX888, I use Popcorn hour for watching videos on my TV. It does an excellent job on playback them, do nice on upscaling them to 1080p when that is needed, it is small, it has a remote, etc.
It's like a DVD standalone player, that playback anything. I can even watch BluRay if I connect a USB BluRay Rom - No menus etc, just the movie. Also, I use it as a torrent client, as an emule client and rapidshare downloader. That way, I don't have to have a PC open all the time. Because of my popcorn hour, I pay 20 euros less per month for power supply. The cost of my A100, is 169 euros: In 8 months, I have my money back just from the money I earn because of the less power supply. I can use it also for web radio, basic web tv and as an external device to store broadcasts from my Dreambox DM800. | ||||
| VirtualDoobMon posted 2009 Jun 11 11:34 | ||||
| JVC's XV-BP1 plays H264 with MKV | ||||
| jagabo posted 2009 Jun 11 11:59 | ||||
Haven't read it yet but: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1131998 | ||||
| DereX888 posted 2009 Jun 11 14:32 | ||||
Cool. But just to add to it: except for BluRay you could do it all on very old computers for long time already (see my previous post). And the power usage you say you save? PCs in standby take certainly not more power than this Popcorn when it is in standby, yet certainly PCs take *less* when they hibernated :) 169 euros is probably ~$250 or so, give or take. I think I could built "cheap PC player" for that much nowadays, or very close - and it would be obviously way better player, capable of playing anything (just in probably uglier case than Popcorn has, since really nice PC cases are very expensive). I fail to see any savings there, sorry Sat. The worst power guzzler is usually TV. If you have plasma it most likely gobbles up 3/4 of your power usage in your living room. Large LCDs are not power shy either. |
Login/Register to our forum to be able to post here.