Talk:ISO MPEG-4

From MultimediaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

i dont see the point in keeping around mpeg4 asp samples with different fourcc's. are they special in any way aside from the fourcc change? --Compn 00:58, 14 December 2008 (EST)

I just thought it's nice to be able to prove the existence of the FourCC in the wild. --Multimedia Mike 03:00, 14 December 2008 (EST)
hmm, i'm still not convinced. how about putting them into a subdir, like V-codecs/MPEG4/DCOD etc? dont want to pollute v-codecs with these... --Compn 08:40, 14 December 2008 (EST)
That might work, though I would like to get some more input from other interested parties before we do this. --Multimedia Mike 12:45, 14 December 2008 (EST)

old

I think the entire conception of this page is confused.

MPEG-4 is a standards suite. It does include H.264. It also includes a whole bunch of crap supposedly related to video in Part 2; really, only a subset of this, ASP, is what we think of as a video codec. Unfortunately the naming wrt to this entire suite (and for that matter, most things MPEG-related) is horrible and confusing, but as currently written, this page is also confused.

In summary, the MPEG-4 suite now contains two completely different video codecs; some audio codec or another; a container format; a popcorn flavoring; a DRM scheme; and a partridge in a pear tree. Saying "MPEG-4" to refer to a type of video is easy, but wrong. IMO maybe we should have all along been using the (stupid, annoying) name "ASP" (Advanced Simple Profile), and this mess wouldn't have gotten as bad as it is. Then, we have Apple confusing the public even further by getting their container format named .mp4... --Snacky 19:28, 26 January 2006 (EST)

Replying to myself here. How about renaming this article to "MPEG-4 ASP" (lame, annoying name IMO but it also happens to be more correct)? Then you could have an "MPEG-4" page that breaks down the standards suite into its components (parts). One component will be "MPEG-4 Part 2", which in turn breaks down into a bunch of profiles, of which only "Simple Profile" and "Advanced Simple Profile" are really of any interest.

Snacky 15:38, 8 May 2006 (EDT)

Snacky-- please, by all means, I invite you to edit this page up one side and down the other. That's what the Wiki concept is for. Split it out into other pages and reorganize as you see fit. We need people who take initiative. I eventually want to cover all of this stuff in the Wiki (everything multimedia, after all). --Multimedia Mike 16:20, 8 May 2006 (EDT)

OK, will do, probably before 1 week passes. I thought I should give warning first. Note that my re-organization of the topics will essentially end up looking like Wikipedia's, which I consider to be more correct. Snacky 16:36, 8 May 2006 (EDT)
I haven't looked at Wikipedia's treatment of the subject but I'm trusting you on this. Ideally, the re-org should provide a roadmap for us to fill in the highly technical details (bitstream syntax, reconstruction process). --Multimedia Mike 18:38, 8 May 2006 (EDT)