 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gibus wrote:
>
> how can i cancel my messages???
> gibus
Select message and select from "Message" menu item "Cancel message".
HTH
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Good to know I'm not the only one using the DivX-Codec.
However: isn't DivX a cracked version of M$ MPEG-4? And if so : isn't that
illegal?
ZK
http://www.povplace.be.tf
Gibus <gib### [at] wanadoo fr> schreef in berichtnieuws
397ee1b5@news.povray.org...
> hi,i'm new in this news group!
> i've made a little macro compatible with the chris colefax's mesh
compressor
> that allow to explose a compressed mesh,here's some examples...
>
> to see the videos,you need the mpeg 4 codec: http://divx.ctw.cc
>
> gibus
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
i think because the download site has not a professional look...
gibus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:59:22 +0200, "Zeger Knaepen"
<zeg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>Good to know I'm not the only one using the DivX-Codec.
I was one of those who explicitly had to download it but do not regret
it the least!
>However: isn't DivX a cracked version of M$ MPEG-4? And if so : isn't that
>illegal?
MPEG is nor owned by M$. They have that .asf or whatever that uses a
limited version of MPEG-4 adopted for low-speed streaming video, but
that's that. When QT4 wasn't out yet (nor MPEG 4) I read a few
articles which pointer the latter as the most probable base for the
former. I've seen it referred to as a wavelet-based compression
algorithm as well as a fractal compression but whether any of these is
true I cannot tell.
As of illegal... come on, this is M$ :)
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> >Good to know I'm not the only one using the DivX-Codec.
>
> I was one of those who explicitly had to download it but do not regret
> it the least!
I'm using it for about half a year... I think I'm one of the first users.
> >However: isn't DivX a cracked version of M$ MPEG-4? And if so : isn't
that
> >illegal?
>
> MPEG is nor owned by M$. They have that .asf or whatever that uses a
> limited version of MPEG-4 adopted for low-speed streaming video, but
> that's that. When QT4 wasn't out yet (nor MPEG 4) I read a few
> articles which pointer the latter as the most probable base for the
> former. I've seen it referred to as a wavelet-based compression
> algorithm as well as a fractal compression but whether any of these is
> true I cannot tell.
But there is a M$-MPEG4-format. That doesn't mean MPEG is owned by M$ of
course...
> As of illegal... come on, this is M$ :)
I didn't say I had a problem using it. Not at all :-)
Illegal or not: DivX is too good to not using it... (Is this correct
English? Guess not :-( )
ZK
http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Zeger Knaepen wrote:
> DivX is too good to not using it...
>(Is this correct English? Guess not :-( )
Most Amerikanskys (self included) would say
"DivX is too good to not be using it".
which would also be incorrect because of the
split infinitive "to be".
Correct would be
"DivX is too good to be not using it".
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
or DivX is too good not to use.
Dick Balaska wrote:
>
> Zeger Knaepen wrote:
> > DivX is too good to not using it...
> >(Is this correct English? Guess not :-( )
>
> Most Amerikanskys (self included) would say
> "DivX is too good to not be using it".
> which would also be incorrect because of the
> split infinitive "to be".
> Correct would be
> "DivX is too good to be not using it".
>
> dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
or divx is good to use 8)
gibus
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <evr1os4but0ehvbfjmbs7ar8gif4c24if9@4ax.com> , Peter Popov
<pet### [at] usanet> wrote:
> When QT4 wasn't out yet (nor MPEG 4) I read a few
> articles which pointer the latter as the most probable base for the
> former.
It is the other way around (except I am misunderstanding you): MPEG-4 is
based on the format of QuickTime. The QuickTime format (.mov, .moov) itself
has nothing to do with any codec, it is a metaformat for any data and is
still the same since QuickTime 1.0. New QuickTime versions basically only
differ in the codecs and codec versions they come with, and of course bug
fixes :-)
The MPEG-4 standard uses the same format but new codecs. You will notice
this when you open any MPEG-4 for file with QuickTime, it will tell you
either that the stream is corrupted (older QuickTime versions return strange
error messages to programs) and new versions will (at least should) tell you
that a codec is missing.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
