[Ffmpeg-devel] On2 Flix Engine uses memcoder in commerical Flix Engine
Thu Apr 27 22:33:35 CEST 2006
Rich Felker wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:10:51PM -0400, John Koleszar wrote:
>> Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>> Out of curiosity: Why do you mux to Ogg? It has very little going for
>> Rather than inventing a new container format, I wanted to use something
>> existing. Ogg was the only one I knew of at the time that allowed you to
>> write a well formatted stream without seeking, a requirement since the
>> data is sent over a pipe.
> NUT is the best choice for this -- it's specifically designed with the
> goal of writing without seeking and never causing more buffering/delay
> than necessary. However...
The thing that amazes me is that nobody else set those as design goals
before. It just seems so fundamental to me. Dare you concede that ogg
got one thing right? :)
>> NUT might be a better choice today (don't know
>> about the license of libnut offhand though), but it wasn't ready a few
>> months ago. The data overhead of ogg in this application isn't _too_
>> bad, though the reference implementation (libogg) sucks horribly,
>> performance wise.
> Unfortunately it's still not a choice YET due to lack of final spec.
> We're essentially frozen now and going to announce the formal freeze
> very soon. Sorry we can't do better on this.
That's ok. It's on my (long) list of things to play with. libogg is a
measurable bottleneck right now, so it might be worth looking at us
switching after things stabilize a bit. I'm definitely keeping an eye on it.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel