Talk:Audio Video Interleave

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] OpenDML

Should OpenDML redirect to AVI? If so, should "OpenDML" be linked in the AVI page?

The same ----- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Video_Interleave

[edit] Disambig for Avi?

Is it not possible to add a disambiguity page here? I'd like to write an article about the author named Avi. I'm sort of new to this, and don't quite know how to do the disambiguity thing. Thanks.

--Jberk 18:33, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is case sensitive. The authors name is Avi, not AVI. No need for a disambig page at AVI. AlistairMcMillan 03:06, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Hey... Using this nk for .avi

[edit] Acronym

I've never known "avee" or "ahveye" (or similar) to mean AVI. I have only ever heard people say "Ay vee eye", which would make this an initialism, right? (I know we're pedantic about the little things, eh?) Please confirm that this is an acronym, or let's change it. --202.164.194.254 03:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

For me it's the other way around, I've never ever heard anyone pronounce the letters independently --129.125.101.92 11:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] contradictory

the article describes avi's obsolescence, and then gives a contradictory external link (myths about avi). in other words, wtf?

[edit] incomplete avi files

Incomplete avi files can be played by generating the index on the fly. Try truncating a file an avi file and putting it in the player from www.divx.com The player will pause for a few seconds and then play as much of the video as is in the file.

[edit] ffdshow codec pack and vlc

ffdshow is not a codec pack but a direct show filter. and imho vlc is overestimated as an magic bullet to solve all problems.

[edit] Peculiar style

What's all this <tt> usage about? --ToobMug 15:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Beats me. Since there seems to be no justification for it, I've removed it. -dmmaus 23:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continued use?

I think this section is in accurate. AVI is still widely used amoung video artist, VJ's and filmakers. I think this section should be re-written. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gumbertron (talk • contribs) 12:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

What exactly is inaccurate about it? The section does not say AVI is not widely used anymore. The fact that it's (considered to be) technically obsolete does not imply people don't use it. Actually, the last paragraph explicitely says that even though better and more advanced formats exist these days, AVI still remains popular thanks to compatibility with existing tools. The same with the MP3 format, for example — many better, more modern and efficient audio compressions have been available for years, yet MP3 still remains the most famous audio format, despite its inferiority. —J. M. 13:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

"AVI is considered by some to be an outdated container format." By who? This needs a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.197.54.247 (talk) 20:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC) I'd suggest this is a weasel-words tactic by a proponent of newer Open Source formats, ie: OGG or MKV. The 15+ year-old AVI format does not natively support all features of a year-old video codec, and this defines it as 'outdated'? Tell that to all the manufacturers of hardware with AVI file playback capabilities nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.64.172.176 (talk) 07:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sentences which are hard (for me) to interpret

[edit] in section "Continued use"

"Ironically, while the codec/container incompatibilities mentioned in the above paragraph have undermined AVI's near-ubiquity, the obscurity and tech-savviness of those involved in the file-sharing groups has rendered this irrelevant." Can be found easier by first going to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Video_Interleave#Continued_use and then searching for the relevant quotation.

I don't understand this section. It uses language which I don't understand. I'm thinking of changing it to more simple language, when I understand it. It will probably increase very much in words for explanation. Is it a good idea? Logictheo 15:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation needed for XVID as choice among most of the piracy groups

I've googled a bit and found the "official scene release" standard from 2005, it's here: http://d0pe0r.1go.dk/rules/txd2k5.nfo If you go to http://d0pe0r.1go.dk/rules/ there are even more nfos and pictures with scene rules. I don't own the site therefore I can not control for how long those documents are available and I'm not even sure if they should be mentioned as support for citation in the article.

http://www.aboutthescene.com/thescene/scenerules.html seems to be a quite reliable source. They list Xvid to be the norm since 2004. I added this citation to the article. 84.61.28.138 06:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pointless Citation Request

There is a sentence in this article that begins with, "The entire structure of a RIFF file was copied from an earlier IFF format devised by Electronic Arts in the mid-1980s". Why is there a citation request for this? Anyone who knows anything about the history of the Interchange File Format knows that RIFF (and thusly AVI) is derived from it. The only thing I can conclude from this is that someone misinterpreted it and thought that AVI was invented in the 1980s, which (at least according to the rest of the article) it wasn't. Would someone please clarify why a citation is desired here? Figs (talk) 10:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Avi Cohen

It is named after Avi Cohen, a developer in Microsoft who came up with the format. -- Is that true? No source is given.

We have an article Avi Cohen, but that must be a different guy, a football (soccer) player.

--Austrian (talk) 18:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)