Is the Divx 😉 codec better than asf/wmv?
First, recall that Divx 😉 is simply an unauthorized modification of Microsoft’s mpeg4-v3 codec commonly used in asf videos. Therefore the video quality and compression is very similiar; but obviously Divx must have some improvements over the plain vanilla codec, and it does of course. Divx is often used for DVD ripping (hi-res and fast-motion) and perhaps it’s better suited for that than asf; I have not done any testing so I really don’t know. I found that Divx;-) has at least one improvement over asf when ripping VCDs: artifacts are reduced in fast-motion videos. However, I also found that the newer Microsoft wmv7 codec does not suffer as much from these artifacts as asf does, therefore if you’re already using wmv for VCD ripping then you probably don’t need the Divx improvement. This also suggests that if you’re using asf, you might want to upgrade to wmv. Going with Divx has the overhead cost of requiring every viewer to install the Divx codec; therefore using wmv would make it si
