Any reason why most dvd player only support xvid, divx and not rmvb and mkv

[c1steady]

I dont see why most dvd player can support xvid, divx and cannot include additional container like mkv, mp4 and rmvb.

Does it due to technological constrain or cost constrain ? Any advise ? I do think that a dvd player will dorminate market share if it is very versatile and can play lots of different format.

[usta]

Most dvd players support divx/xvid encoded videos that are:
a) compliant MPEG4 part2 standard
b) encoded in Simple Profile (SP)
c) packaged in avi container

Therefore, your question becomes: why avi and not mkv, mp4 and rmvb?

[jman98]

It is both due to technology and cost.

1) The earliest decoder chips only supported Divx/Xvid decoding and AVI containers in addition to MPEG-1/2 decoding and playback.
2) Chips that only support AVI containers and Divx/Xvid are very cheap right now.
3) Assuming you pay the money to get a better decoding chip that can support more codecs and containers, you have to write firmware that supports these. It costs money to develop the firmware to support more playback options.

I see some evidence that the industry is moving towards support of MKV and MP4 in more devices, but RMVB will always be poorly supported. If it wasn't for anime fans, almost nobody on earth would use RMVB. And why they decided to use it instead of one of the other better supported and higher quality codecs is a great question that seems to defy rational explanation.

[aedipuss]

you almost answered your own question. mkv is a container, not a format. almost anything can be put in it. there isn't any way to support it in hardware. mp4 is a format, it may gain support in more devices.

[lordsmurf]

MP4 is a container too, not a format. AVI is a container. MKV is a container.

- MPEG-4 Part 2 is the Divx / Xvid standard, in AVI container.
- AVC MPEG-4 Part 10 H.264 is the other format that will probably be supported eventually. MP4 is common container, but 3GP may be supported too since it's so prevalent in phones.
- RealMedia looks like shit, don't even know why it exists. All Real formats are inferior. They were nice to have in the 1990s, but that was long ago. Anime fans need to pull their heads out of their collective asses.

Beyond this, a DVD-Video player exists to play DVD-Video formatted discs. These extra formats were extras that VERY FEW players had. So I don't know where this idea of "most dvd player" came from -- that's not true.

The costs (especially royalties) are why it's not more common.

[usta]

Well, the DVD players that claim to play divx or MPEG4 almost always mean avi container.
While we see more and more video files encoded in mkv or mp4, there are still huge amount of video encoded and distributed in avi container.
Does anyone have a good explanation for this?

[edDV]

Well, the DVD players that claim to play divx or MPEG4 almost always mean avi container.
While we see more and more video files encoded in mkv or mp4, there are still huge amount of video encoded and distributed in avi container.
Does anyone have a good explanation for this?

Explanation for the avi container?

Historical. divx/xvid were first to be supported and they used the avi container. Early bird gets the worm.

People use avi container so it will play in their divx/xvid DVD player.

[guns1inger]

Divx/Xvid take up was also helped along by the fact that Divx created a certification standard for Divx hardware playback. This made the larger companies feel more secure in adopting it, and Xvid came along for the ride as it was a) compatible, and b) royalty free