DivX HiQ better than Adobe at Flash video?

[Emil]

DivX has released Beta 2 of DivX HiQ, a free bundle of applications for Windows and Mac, and has made some pretty big claims about one of its components. DivX Web Player latches itself onto the YouTube player and a bunch of other common video players online, and offers an alternative black/blue Play button that will take over and play the source video using its own codec. DRM-wrapped videos are not supported.

"DivX rep Ryan Taylor told me that his company's video decoding technology is just better, which means devices running it can do more video with less horsepower, leading to better-looking movies, better battery life, and cooler laps," according to CNET. "The HiQ product can also use the graphics processor of the computer it's running on, to put the video decoding on the chip best designed to do it."

This is good news: competition in the video player space on the Web will surely yield a better experience for users. Still, it's hard to say at this point if users with netbooks or slower systems will want to install DivX HiQ to get a performance boost, but right now we don't recommend doing so as it's still in beta anyway.

Adobe Flash 10.2 entered beta last week. 10.2 introduces Stage Video, a new API that delivers high performance video playback across platforms, and IE9 hardware acceleration support. DivX says its video playback is still more processor-efficient than the Flash 10.2 beta.

Until the two are out of beta, it's not a good idea to mark either of them as the winner. Even then, we would not be surprised if both plug-ins performed differently on various systems. Either way, regardless of what you end up using, it seems that you're going to get some sort of performance boost.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/41500-divx-hiq-better-than-adobe-at-flash-video.html

 

[mario]

Would have been nice a link to HiQ

I know i can google it but still...

 

[MrAnderson]

I'm glad to see divx still doing its thing. They do make good software, and it is a shame that they still are in the background (at least i the US dispite the format being able to be played in many media devices).

A link is present?? Ah, could it be the wonders of updating data on the web? Or perhaps the commenter did not notice the links?

In any case writers must be careful no to fall into the trap of removing or modify information without acknowledging change. This kind of policy towards how news is published can invalidate constructive and relevant feedback, which ultimately has made the article better. Moreover, some might argue that the integrity of acknowledging error and making corrections should be kept and transparent to your readers even in a digital world.

Although I?m not making any accusations =) Just providing a little food for thought. Cheers

 

[HiDDeNMisT]

Well in all honesty I find that when I watch videos on Divx they tend to be a lot better in quality then any flash videos.

 

[Guest]

That's what we need now, another proprietary codec.
Divx milked MPEG-4, part 2 for quite a while.
Enough with proprietary codecs, that's why MPEG was created so we don't have to deal with Flash, divx, matrosca, VP8, etc. It is a nightmare for all CE manufacturers to try to support all these with zero benefit to the consumer.

 

[Guest]

I just found out about the new divx and was just wondering... I play a popular flash-based game online... could divx hi-q help with streaming games as well, or is it just for the playback of videos?
Obviously, I've got more searching to do to try to find an answer to this, but just thought I'd throw my query into the mix.

 

[Bleeder]

Regarding "another proprietary codec": While that is a valid arguing point, HiQ does have a valid use case: old, non-UVD2 compliant hardware.