By: Dummond D. Slow (mental.delete@this.protozoa.us), November 18, 2020 12:25 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on November 18, 2020 11:03 am wrote:
> Dummond D. Slow (mental.delete@this.protozoa.us) on November 18, 2020 9:21 am wrote:
> > Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on November 18, 2020 9:13 am wrote:
> > >
> > > x264 in SPEC is not there to help you decide which PC to buy for ripping DVD content!
> > > It is there as an exemplar of certain styles of code: various generic compression techniques
> > > (so lots of bit by bit manipulation) and various image analysis techniques (so searches
> > > over images and image comparisons at various frequency granularities).
> > >
> >
> > You didn't read it? If x264 is example of a kind of code, it is an example of code
> > heavily optimised with multimedia (integer) SIMD. It's a greeat example or maybe
> > too great, other codebases like ffmpeg or x265 will be a bit less optimized.
> >
> > If you want to explore such code, run it with assembly. It has assembly for ARM too, and not that
> > little of it. Without SIMD, it is the opposite of example of multimedia compression code.
> >
> > "Various generic compression techniques", my butt. This is an area I
> > know, so please don't talk armchair nonsense like you did just now.
>
> Armchair nonsense? OK then. I guess you don't know my employment history...
>
Funny you say that because I do know. Was it Quicktime or do I have different person? I wondered if you'll bring it up, because...
Quicktime in fact has been the laughingstock of AVC encoding pretty much during the whole era H.264 mattered (by that I mean say 2007-2012, if Quicktime's software got better after that, sorry). But hey, at least it was able to beat Theora in quality. Or I think it was, but the encoding test results were not pretty to put it mildly.
For that matter, even QT's AVC decoding was plain horrible (basic features not decoding properly, performance was meh too, at least on x86/x64), lol. And decoder is the easy thing.
The software might have been better in all the other things it does and it's AAC encoder is very nice if not best.
But it's AVC encodeing was PoS without any hyperbole. So if you want to raise it as a proof you know this stuff, then AHUM AHUM.
> Dummond D. Slow (mental.delete@this.protozoa.us) on November 18, 2020 9:21 am wrote:
> > Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on November 18, 2020 9:13 am wrote:
> > >
> > > x264 in SPEC is not there to help you decide which PC to buy for ripping DVD content!
> > > It is there as an exemplar of certain styles of code: various generic compression techniques
> > > (so lots of bit by bit manipulation) and various image analysis techniques (so searches
> > > over images and image comparisons at various frequency granularities).
> > >
> >
> > You didn't read it? If x264 is example of a kind of code, it is an example of code
> > heavily optimised with multimedia (integer) SIMD. It's a greeat example or maybe
> > too great, other codebases like ffmpeg or x265 will be a bit less optimized.
> >
> > If you want to explore such code, run it with assembly. It has assembly for ARM too, and not that
> > little of it. Without SIMD, it is the opposite of example of multimedia compression code.
> >
> > "Various generic compression techniques", my butt. This is an area I
> > know, so please don't talk armchair nonsense like you did just now.
>
> Armchair nonsense? OK then. I guess you don't know my employment history...
>
Funny you say that because I do know. Was it Quicktime or do I have different person? I wondered if you'll bring it up, because...
Quicktime in fact has been the laughingstock of AVC encoding pretty much during the whole era H.264 mattered (by that I mean say 2007-2012, if Quicktime's software got better after that, sorry). But hey, at least it was able to beat Theora in quality. Or I think it was, but the encoding test results were not pretty to put it mildly.
For that matter, even QT's AVC decoding was plain horrible (basic features not decoding properly, performance was meh too, at least on x86/x64), lol. And decoder is the easy thing.
The software might have been better in all the other things it does and it's AAC encoder is very nice if not best.
But it's AVC encodeing was PoS without any hyperbole. So if you want to raise it as a proof you know this stuff, then AHUM AHUM.
