[MPlayer-users] divx6

[Thomas Martinsen]

Those .divx files, are mis-labeled .avi files.
Divx.com released a new container now, it's own not AVI.

The Wanderer wrote:

> Kichigai Mentat wrote:
>
>> On Jun 22, 2005, at 07.21, Guillaume POIRIER wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 6/22/05, Alejandro Vargas <alejandro.anv at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've tried to play a .divx file (divx6) and worked right (and is
>>>> identified as divx5). But what about the menus,
>>>
>>>
>>> Same status as for DVDs IMHO: probably never. :-(
>>>
>>>> subtitles, sound tracks, etc. that is supposed to can hold the
>>>> new ".divx" files?
>>>
>>>
>>> Sound tracks should work all right, as multiple sound tracks are
>>> already supported. As far as subs, why not? Patches are surely
>>> welcome! :-)
>>
>>
>> Actually, I think the only files that have multiple soundtracks and
>> possibly multiple subtitles supported is Matroska and OGM.
>>
>> But, unless the popularity of .divx picks up, especially in the open
>> source community (read: open command-line conversion apps become
>> available), I'm not too sure that MPlayer's community will pick up on
>> it, sadly. .divx might be treated as more of a proprietary
>> container.
>
>
> ...are you sure it's a separate container format? I downloaded some
> files with the .divx extension at least three years ago (I forget the
> exact duration, it was before I moved to Linux), and they played just
> fine in various programs; I believe they were simply AVI files with DivX
> video, which someone had decided to call .divx instead of .avi. Are the
> files mentioned by the OP actually a new container, or just more of the
> same?
>
> If in fact they *are* AVI files, then there's already been much
> discussion of embedded-soft-subtitle issues, and why they not only
> currently don't work but are unlikely to work in the near future.
>
> (And aren't some supported containers, such as Real, considered
> proprietary?)
>