Showing posts with label difference. Show all posts
Showing posts with label difference. Show all posts

Thursday, March 15, 2012

What's the Difference Between All These Video Formats, and Which One Should I Use? [Video]

Dear Lifehacker,
I know a lot of video players (like PotPlayer) can play any video file out there, but why are there so many video formats in the first place? Is there a real difference between DivX and XviD, or MP4, and MKV? When I rip a DVD, or go hunting for downloads, which format is the best to use?


Sincerely,
Confused About Codecs


Dear Confused,
The world of video formats can be pretty confusing, but there are only a few things you really need to know. First, it's important to note that a video format is more than just its file extension. Extensions like AVI are not, in fact, video codecs—they're containers. A container is the file format which can use multiple different codecs—such as DivX or x264—to compress a certain standard of video—such as MPEG-4 or H.264, respectively—into a hard-drive friendly amount of space. Here's what you need to know about both codecs and containers, and what that means for the videos you rip yourself.


Most of the video you'll come across is compressed, meaning its been altered to take up less space on your computer. For example, a regular Blu-Ray disc usually takes up around 30 or 50GB of space—which is a lot for a normal person to download or store on their hard drive. So, we compress movies to make them more manageable, usually with some loss in video quality.


A codec compresses and decompresses data. It interprets the video file and determines how to play it on your screen. Your computer comes with many codecs pre-installed, though you can install codec packs for wider support, or a program like VLC or PotPlayer (which we prefer to codec packs). Some examples include:

FFmpeg (which includes formats like MPEG-2, the format in which DVDs are stored, and MPEG-4, which is the video format Apple uses in the iTunes store)DivX, which works with a certain type of MPEG-4 file, and was often used to rip DVDs in the pre-HD eraXviD, an open source version of DivX, popular among movie piratesx264, which compresses H.264 videos (Also known as MPEG-4 AVC), and is very popular for high definition videos

There are a lot of different codecs out there, and it can get really confusing with all the different versions of MPEG standards. These days, you really only need to concern yourself with a few—which we'll talk about in a couple minutes.


A container is, essentially, a bundle of files. Usually a container consists of a video codec and an audio codec, though it can also contain things like subtitles. Containers allow you to choose one codec for your video and one for your audio, which is nice—that way, you can choose to use the high-quality DTS audio, or compress your audio to something like MP3 for even more space savings. It just gives you a bit more control over how you record your videos or rip your movies. Popular containers include:

AVIMatroska (which uses the extension MKV)MP4 (which has been popularized by Apple in the iTunes Store—note that this can also come with the M4V extension, but the container is the exact same)MOV (which was created by Apple)

The main difference between different containers is not only the codecs they support but what other features they support—like subtitles or chapters. These days, MKV is an extremely popular container, mainly because it supports nearly any video codec under the sun, as well as a ton of extra features (plus it's open source).


These days, you'll only really come across a few different codecs and containers as you browse the web for video. DivX and XviD (DivX's open source counterpart) are popular for standard-definition videos, like ripped DVDs, but are mostly outdated, so I wouldn't use them to rip your own DVDs. Handbrake, our favorite DVD ripper and video encoder, supports three video codecs (which you can see under the "Video" tab) and two containers (which you'll find under "Output Settings"). H.264, which Handbrake uses by default, will give you the best quality, though if you don't care about quality, MPEG-4 will probably compress faster. As for containers, both MKV and MP4 support high quality H.264 video, but in general we prefer MKV for almost everything, since it has a few more extra features, supports higher quality audio, and is open source. The one downside of MKV is that it isn't as well supported by certain programs and devices. So, if you're putting these videos on your iPad, Apple TV, or Xbox 360, for example, you'll want to go with the more widely supported MP4. If you're watching them in VLC, PotPlayer, XBMC, or another video player that supports MKV, then MKV is the way to go.


That's a lot of information to throw at you in a few paragraphs, but like we said—despite how big and confusing the world of video is, a lot of those codecs are outdated, and you only really need to concern yourself with a few. If you want a more detailed comparison, check out Wikipedia's Comparison of Video Codecs, Comparison of Container Formats, and its entry on MPEG for more info on all the different variations of the MPEG standards of video compression.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Facebook, the Timeline, and the difference between consuming and creating

Facebook, the Timeline, and the difference between consuming and creating | Rafe's Radar - CNET News CNET News @import "http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/Ads/common/css/SponsoredTextLink/sponsoredTextLink.live.css"; Manage Packages With UPS My Choice Home Reviews Cell Phones Camcorders Digital Cameras Laptops TVs Car Tech Forums Appliances Cell Phone Accessories Components Desktops E-book Readers Games and Gear GPS Hard Drives & Storage Headphones Home Audio Home Video Internet Access Monitors MP3 Players Networking and Wi-Fi Peripherals Printers Software Tablets Web Hosting You are here: News Latest News Mobile Startups Cutting Edge Media Security Business Tech Health Tech Crave Apple Microsoft Politics & Law Gaming & Culture Blogs Video Photos RSS Download Windows Software Mac Software Mobile Apps Web Apps The Download Blog CNET TV How To Computers Home Theater Smartphones Tablets Web Marketplace Log In | Join Log In Join CNET Sign in with My profile Log out .mad_center {text-align:center;} .mad_center div, .mad_center table, .mad_center iframe, .mad_center a img {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;}Click Here
CNET News Rafe's Radar Facebook, the Timeline, and the difference between consuming and creating Rafe Needleman by Rafe Needleman February 17, 2012 4:11 PM PST Follow @rafe

An update to the otherwise great Pixable photo viewing app illustrates that not all Timeline verbs should be streamed into the Timeline.

Oversharing. Thanks for nothing, Pixable.

(Credit:Screenshot by Rafe Needleman/CNET)

I have been meaning to write about Pixable, an excellent mobile app for keeping up with Facebook images on youriPhone oriPad. Unlike Facebook's own mobile app, which I find slow, complicated, and crash-prone, Pixable lets you dive into your social photo stream in a snap, see what friends are posting, and get out fast. There's more to it, too, and it's all good. It's a great app to pull up on that short elevator ride.

At least it was, until today's update of the app, which adds Facebook Timeline integration. Now, whenever you view a stream or follow a user, that activity appears in your Facebook timeline.

No, thanks. App vendors need to understand something. There is a big--no, giant--difference between viewing a social stream and contributing to it. When a user tags, likes, or comments on an item on a social network, they are doing it for other people. Or, to be more psychologically accurate, they're doing it for the ego boost that comes from having other people see their activity. It makes sense to post contributions to a timeline.

But just consuming, without contributing? Not necessarily. When a person views a post, a photo, or a stream; or when one listens to music or watches a video, they're not necessarily doing it for anyone's benefit. For my part, when I want someone to know I viewed something, I'm intentional about, by Liking or commenting on it.

This is why I disconnected Spotify from my Timeline (here's how). I don't listen to music to be cool. Or rather, when I do, I'll tell you about it.

Pixable can also do it right: I can elect to not share my hastagging of this photo with Facebook. Good kitty.

(Credit:Macho the cat, Facebook photo by Leyl Master Black) In the current update, Pixable gets this completely backwards. If you use the app, all your photo viewing activity shows up in a timeline. There's no way to turn it off. From within Facebook itself you can block Pixable or delete Timeline items, but that doesn't make Pixable's lack of control ok.

On the other hand, when you go to a specific photo and decide to comment on it or tag it, there's an easy way to toggle on or off your Facebook sharing of that activity.

The on/off switch belongs in both places, but more in the place it's not: In the stream viewing function. It's coming, I'm told, it's just not here yet.

I still like Pixable, but until the company gets this right, I'm not using it.

I'm hoping that other developers take two lessons away from this, and from the recent privacy upsets from earlier in the week:

1. Transparency is key. If you're going to share what I do on your service, tell me before you do it. How am I supposed to trust you if you don't?

2. Control is just as important. Just because you, Mr or Ms developer, thinks something is cool, it doesn't mean the user will. Especially when it comes to the use of their personal or activity data. Let the user decide. If, for some reason, you think you'll lose out by giving them this control (viral growth, revenues, etc.), that is your indicator that you are about to do the wrong thing.

Do the right thing. Ultimately, it will make your product, and your company, more successful.