Why is it that every program needs a 'codec'

[didikai]

Why the f**** is it that every program needs a 'codec' or an 'upgrade' or a 'fix'.
I'm sick of getting programs that just don't work without hours of scanning Google for the appropriate 'upgrade' etc

I know that computers and programs are sophisticated pieces of technology, but why the F*** can't they get get thinsg to work without 5 million problems and patches.

I can buy a DVD recorder and it wll record anything I want to record.
But try to capture the same program in Nero!
Instant brain damage!

[jimmalenko]

But try to capture the same program in Nero!
Instant brain damage!

That's your problem right there.

Only use Nero for burning


The problem is that there are just endless combinations of hardware and software available now, such that software developers have to write code to be able to adapt to massive numbers of different configurations. They can only test their product on so many of the configurations, and when an end-user (or users) finds a problem, that's when a fix gets written. If we were to limit PC & Mac builds / parts / software to only about half a dozen different configs (like there is with TV), then maybe the software developers could write software to work on all 6 varieties without needing patches, instead of the almost unlimited number of possible options that exist today.

[Krispy Kritter]

Most software usually works just fine right out of the box, there are exceptions of course. But for the most part, patches and "fixes" are for the few users that have issues with a particular function and/or to support software and hardware that becomes available after the product shipped.

[jdizzy40]

And it is so very important to keep your hardware current. In other words don't expect to get perfect results running a 5 year old computer running Windows 98 and a 500 mhz CPU with 128mbs of RAm. You have to invest if you want to do video work at the upper end level.

[greymalkin]

i'm quite happy with the software out there right now and have had minimal problems. I believe the problem here is somewhere between the keyboard and the chair.

[didikai]

i'm quite happy with the software out there right now and have had minimal problems. I believe the problem here is somewhere between the keyboard and the chair.

I guess by the huge volume of posts on this forum that there are lots of us

[lordsmurf]

Nero is burning software. Nothing more.
I don't care what they try to do or sell to you, it works poorly.
Burning only, nothing else.

[celtic_druid]

I wouldn't say that exactly. Ahead hire or outsource technical knowledge for areas other than burning.

They wanted a virtual drive. They hired the Daemon-Tools team.
They wanted a DVD transcoder. They hired DVD Shrink.
For video they choose Ateme. They have also hired many developers who were previously working on OSS projects which had proven their expertise. As a consequence their ASP, AVC and aac codecs work very well.

[pchan]

I wouldn't say that exactly. Ahead hire or outsource technical knowledge for areas other than burning.

They wanted a virtual drive. They hired the Daemon-Tools team.
They wanted a DVD transcoder. They hired DVD Shrink.
For video they choose Ateme. They have also hired many developers who were previously working on OSS projects which had proven their expertise. As a consequence their ASP, AVC and aac codecs work very well.

Jack of all trades and master of none.
If they don't stay focus, Roxio may leave them biting dust !

[Krispy Kritter]

Roxio....THE example of trying to do too much.

[ROF]

Nero is burning software. Nothing more.
I don't care what they try to do or sell to you, it works poorly.
Burning only, nothing else.

It's a good label maker too.

[TooLFooL]

what about nero recode? wasn't that a decent program? similar to shrink...?

as far as the original question though, these days computers are so complex that problems with software arise that couldn't possibly ever be discovered during beta testing. patches mean they're still working on it, that's good.

[lordsmurf]

My comments are only related to it's performance with capturing, encoding, authoring video.

Transcoding, label making, virtual drives ... that's not really what I was thinking of, as it's not part of the original question in this thread.

[ChrissyBoy]

Writing a program that works for everyone and that every one is happy with is like cooking for the same number of people & expecting perfect experiences… impossible.

That accounts for the fix/update part: the infinite combination of existing hardware & software within the user base.

There a many other complexities, CODECs being one of them. The problem here is that each (av) software application you install claims the rights to deal with various codecs via directshow filters by merit. The best thing is to use software which doesn’t require a codec and so will not succumb to this battle, but if your software must use codecs then make sure you resolve the merits/weighting of the various filters…. There are filter managers which will help you here.

[edDV]

Ho hum
What is this thread about other than one busting his ass for a free solution vs. shareware donations?

[edDV]

Now if the helpless victum would paint my fences and stack the wood while I dig for his codec needs ... want my Amtrack station?