DIVX Aftermath: Reader Comments

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE DISCUSSES READER REACTION REGARDING THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE DIVX DVD FORMAT ORGINALLY CONCEIVED OF IN 1997 BY CIRCUIT CITY AND DOES NOT REFER TO THE CURRENT DIVX VIDEO CODEC NOW IN USE FOR INTERNET VIDEO APPLICATIONS.

Wow! Reader response to last week's article on the demise of DIVX was so heavy that I spent most of the week reading and answering your emails on the topic. As a result, I thought I would depart from my usual article format and share some of the most passionate comments (both pro and con) concerning this topic. Comments used with permission.

I must say that most of the response was indeed favorable to the demise of DIVX format for many reasons; here are some samples:

"Dear Mr. Silva,
This is regarding your recent article, "DIVX Bites The Dust!". I liked the article, but you didn't mention some additional reasons for DIVX's downfall, such as its lack of special features and wide-screen format. It simply lacked some of the appeal that Open DVD possesses. Also, it would have been nice to mention that a $100 refund is available. Otherwise, I think your story was thorough -- keep up the good work.
I am very pleased that DIVX is dead. I knew it was inevitable, but I couldn't foresee it happening this soon.
Sincerely,
Shannon Shiflett"

"I enjoyed your article on the demise of DIVX. I've been hoping for this for a long time. In general, I'm negative on any type of pay-per-view technology, whether it be TV or a format like DIVX. I don't think most people are interested in it. I think it only works for things like live events on TV (fights, concerts, etc.).
I don't think we should feel too sorry for those people who bought DIVX players. At the time, I'm sure they thought the concept was good. I hated the concept and would never have bought one of these machines. They voted with their money, just as I did by withholding mine. I think the slogan "let the buyer beware" applies here.
Eventually, I plan on buying a DVD player. I'm just waiting for the prices to be "fleshed out" similar to the CD player market. Pretty soon, I think one will be able to pick up a nicely featured DVD player for $250.
Mike Keenly"

"There's joy, joy, joy in my heart . . . that DIVX is dead. What an unbelievable rip-off this was from the very beginning. Being a pretty knowledgable consumer in the electronics field I was appalled after giving a Circuit City rep the opportunity to explain the advantages of DIVX over regular DVDs. The benefits that he described were the very weaknesses that just about anyone with a flexible neck supporting that roundish thing on top could see through with room to spare. And they didn't even make them available in Wide screen which is probably one of the very best features of the DVD format.
As a consumer I am rejoicing wildly at the demise of this, as you so accurately put it, greedily STUPID marketing move. Thank God I'm not stuck with one of their over-priced obsolete units.
Hail the consumer!
Bob Foster"

"We read with interest and dismay your article on the demise of DIVX. We were one of the dummies who bought a DIVX player from Circuit City last Christmas after being "assured" that all the stories about DIVX being in trouble were totally wrong. The salesman practically drew graphs showing us how DIVX could not lose. I don't mind being taken, if I have made a decision based on facts that prove wrong. I do mind being taken when I have been purposely mislead.
Do you know if there is any recourse for those of us who were duped? Thank you,
Theodore Meyer"
(Guide Note: Have no fear--your player can still play regular DVD's--but go back to my article:
/library/weekly/aa062199.htm
and check out the links at the bottom of the article concerning some of the programs that Circuit City may be offering to you--good luck!)

"I agree with you in the matter of Circuit City and DVD. It not only applies to them but our free market is flooded with rapists like them. Rape the consumer is the corporate motto: lets get theirs and ours too. Again the public is not so stupid. My hat goes off to every consumer who boycotted this platform.
Denny Branham"

"Hi, I just wanted to say that I 'm glad Divx is dead. When I first heard about Circuit City supporting the Divx format, I was so upset that my family stopped shopping at Circuit City. I wonder if Circuit City knows that they lost alot of business because of their support of Divx.
Don Westbrook"

"Hi, I want to congratulate you on a well written article on the death of Divx, I been following their story for awhile now on the usernet newsgroup: alt.dvd. Have always hated the format, and am tickle pink they went down.
I do have problems with some of the press releases that news media was using for their reporting on this demise. Unlike you, they just use Circuit City's words. It kills me to hear them say something like, "Another superior format bites the dust; like Betamax before it Divx has fallen, not to lack of consumer support, but lack of industry support."
PLEASE!!! If I read something like that again, I am going to throw up. There was nothing superior to dvd in divx, pay-per-view that offers so little, it was pathetic.
Mark Gentry"

On the opposing side (those upset at either my article and/or the demise of DIVX) there were also many comments; here are some samples:

"What is the problem with a format that allows viewers to rent movies in DVD format that they could keep and view any time they pleased without ever having to go back to the video store to return the stupid disc and worrying about all that? I don't understand where the animosity for all of this began. I have a DIVX player that I have owned for 4 months now and it is just perfect. It costs just as much as some of the higher end DVD players plus it has the capability to play DIVX movies. I found this to be an extreme advantage to this player and am still happy with my purchase. In fact I consider it one of the smartest investments I have ever made. I still watch DIVX movies all the time and own over 20 of them while owning just 2 DVD films. It is simply more cost effective and unless I plan on viewing a certain movie more that a few times (more than a rental would suffice for) I would rather just have the DIVX version for 4 dollars. This whole debate is silly and I find it unplausible.
Juntador"

"In your article today you forgot to mention that DIVX owners get $100.00 for being part of an Experiment that failed - not bad and totally unexpected. You did not stress - to my mind at least - that DIVX players will still play DVD disk's just fine. You also forgot to mention that Current DIVX Disk's are good for 2 years.
Do you think that Beta Max owners got $100.00 for that failed Experiment? Or do you think MD (Mini Disk) owners will get anything back when Sony pulls the plug on the MD. Circuit City has played fair with the Consumers and I think you did not point that out.
BTW - Are you a DIVX owner - or are you just taking shoots from the sideline? (Guide Note: I am not a DIVX owner, but had been following its genesis well before its release in the marketplace.) BTW - I do not work for any group involved in the DIVX Experiment. I am someone that does tend to have the latest Electronics - but not all. I had one of the first DBS Dishes and one of the first VHS systems (lucky me) - both of which "Won" and I have a DVD player - which will also win - even if the DIVX Option did not.
Thanks,
T. Trev Teel"
(Guide Note: Check out my article for the links concerning Circuit City's Rebate Program for DIVX owners.)

"Mr. Silva,
I should admit, up front, that I find it irritating, more or less, to be called stupid. As I have established my intellectual competence to my own satisfaction, however, and don't depend on the affirmation of unknown home electronics editors, I will let it slide (true, it was DIVX you said was stupid, but I can only imply you mean me too, since I bought a DIVX enhanced DVD player). What irritates me more, however, is that, perhaps, you ARE right. I'm so stupid, I can't follow your reasoning.
For example, your first paragraph makes the claim that the whole DIVX format is conceived in greed and perpetrated with guile (actually, that isn't an argument, but an ad hominem attack). Now, those lawyers (some would say that adding greedy is redundant) may well have wanted to undermine Open DVD, but I was not aware that God had ordained DVD as the only morally acceptable choice. Perhaps I missed that press briefing. I can even imagine there might have been some similar lawyers involved in bringing out DVD. More precisely, I can't imagine there weren't. It seems to stupid old me that DVD intends to undermine VHS, as VHS successfully undermined Beta, etc. Furthermore, since the players support both DVD and DIVX, "undermine" seems rather too strong.
As for continuing revenue stream, every business in the world that wants to make a profit looks for ways to garner continuing revenue (some telemarketers and vacuum salesmen apparently excepted). If you use a cellular phone, watch cable or satellite TV, or use a razor with disposable blades, you are participating in someone's "scheme" to collect continuing revenue. I fail to see how this is worse than other systems, given that no one is forced to use DIVX, including those foolish enough to have a DIVX player.
Now don't get me wrong, I was reluctant at first to get a DIVX player. I am philosophically wary of proprietary systems, and the idea of paying over and over again for something seems backwards. But as I investigated the issue, it became obvious that there were some real advantages to DIVX. For near the cost of renting a VHS movie, I get a superior quality picture, I don't have to worry that the last Bozo to rent it didn't rewind, or that his machine stretched the tape all out of recognition, and I don't have to take it back, or be sure I watch it right away. I like to buy movies that I know I want, but there are movies I'm not sure of, and DIVX lets me find out, risk-free. I don't take my movies somewhere else to view them, so I accept the potential loss of freedom.
You made one potentially good point - DIVX has a near real-time record of my viewing habits - but then again, Bill Clinton's book buying habits are a matter of public record now, too. Anymore, most stores have the ability to track every purchase I make. Whether they do or not is a matter of speculation, perhaps, but a risk we all take daily.
You talk about the big financial loss I suffer as a consumer. The fact is, I have lost nothing. I looked seriously at this very issue when I bought my player. I asked myself, "What if DIVX fails? What have I lost?" I lose the ability to watch my DIVX movies again - the same as if I had rented (and it turns out they will continue to work for two more years). I lose the cost of the DIVX enhancement - more than made up for in the value I got from the machine out of the box (and with the DIVX rebate, even that is not an issue). And I still have a fully functional DVD player. As for extended warranties - in my case, it is handled by the vendor. They have proven themselves to honor their commitments to me, and I have no doubt that they will in this case as well. If they don't, well, I have been burned before -I can take it, but the vendor will have lost a satisfied customer. That's the way the market works.
Finally, you appear to make a really dubious assertion when you say: "While there is no absolute guarantee that any new product will be successful, does the consumer have to now think twice about his purchase of that 'new fangled, does everything' electronics product?" I learned long ago to think twice about purchasing that "'new fangled, does everything' electronics product". I am incredulous that you, a writer about this industry, haven't.
Maybe I am too stupid to understand, but I for one, am sad to see the demise of DIVX. It was one of the few really bright ideas to come along, in that it met my needs without forcing me to make a choice that would haunt me if it turned out to be the "wrong" one. While the ride was short, I had fun while it lasted.
I have no regrets.
Timothy A. Johnson"

As you can see above, many of us are very passionate about our electronic "gadgets". To sum up this topic (although, I am sure this article will generate even more discussion!), here is a final Point/CounterPoint from your About.com Guide and Timothy A. Johnson:

From your About.com Guide:
Having followed the progress of DIVX well before its introduction into the marketplace--I stand by my position for several reasons:
1. DIVX did not advance DVD technology that was already available in the marketplace.
2. DIVX is not compatible with any computer DVD ROM or RAM system available for those who use their computers to play DVD's.
3. DIVX discs lack important features, such as Widescreen releases and Supplementary materials, such as director's comments, "making of features", etc...
4. DIVX releases were confined to popular films, not historical or classic films that studios are releasing on DVD (this was primarily by design of the studios involved).
5. DIVX discs can only be played on the machine that they are registered to--If your friend has a DIVX player you couldn't take advantage of the 48hr viewing priviledge on another machine--also, you couldn't "loan'" your disc to a friend.
6. DVD rentals are very common now--with some stores offering 5-day rentals--so DIVX was redundant in the rental area. (DVD rentals for 5-days are often less than the 48hr DIVX rental fees).
7. DVD's can be traded, resold, and played on ANY DVD machine--DIVX cannot.
8. The backers of DVD are committed to advancing all aspects of DVD technology: DVD ROM/RAM, DVD Audio, High Definition DVD, and recordable DVD, with new products to keep up with advancing technology. DIVX had no forseeable committments in this area--just Pay-per-view.
9. DIVX players cost between $50 to $100 more than their DVD player counterparts, while offering no signifigant benefits that DVD players already offer.
10. Your DIVX has to be connected to your phone line--along with your computer, your satellite dish, not to mention your phone--not everyone has multiple phone lines.
11. Even though one can purchase "unlimited" viewing on a DIVX disc, the Studios had the right to rescind that priviledge if they so chose--(Like DISNEY often does when they withdraw their video releases from the market from time to time). So, after paying the "unlimited" fee--you could still find yourself with an unviewable movie.
12. With DVD you can rent it or own it--when you own it-it is your property to do with as you please--except making illegal copies. DIVX is subject to what Circuit City or the participating studios want to do with it--it is their property.
13. And, for those that are environmentally concious, after you view your DIVX disc, will you throw it away (polluting the environment)? At least with a DVD rental, it can be viewed by another (you don't have to worry what machine it was played on previously--all DVD and DIVX discs are optically read by a laser).
Finally, to their credit--Circuit City is doing a good job to support the demise of DIVX through their generous offers--they really have no choice, however, if they want to stay in the home electronics business--a $114,000,000.00 loss is a big chunk of change. They need all the customer good will they can get right now--especially with BEST BUY and FRY's Electronics on a huge upswing.
NOTE--You may remember in the early days of the LaserDisc, that RCA introduced a competing format called CED Video Disc, which lasted several years--LaserDisc won that battle and remained (and is still here) after almost 20 years. Some of the problems with CED, such as inferior picture quality and initial players and software releases not offfering stereo sound or widescreen reproduction doomed the format right out of the gate. RCA lost several hundred million on that gamble--It's suprising to me that Circuit City didn't learn from history about introducing a product into the marketplace that didn't add to the current status of what was already available.
In my article, there was no intention to refer to any indviduals as "stupid" for buying or being a supporter of DIVX--everyone places their vote in the marketplace--but having experience in the retail marketplace and knowing the background of DIVX, I still stand by my statement that Circuit City and their Associates made a truly stupid mistake regarding the release of the DIVX format. They never had the support they needed in the beginning -- also, no retailer in their right mind wants to put money in their competitor's pocket. If DIVX had been developed by or in conjunction with a broader base of Manufacturers in the beginning, it may have gotten off to a better start and created a niche--just like VHS-C and 8mm co-exist in the Camcorder world.
Robert Silva, homeelectronic.guide@about.com

From Timothy A. Johnson:
"I would guess you have gotten a lot of mail on this topic, but I'll add just a bit more. I won't respond directly to each of your points, but a few comments seem necessary.
1. I agree that DIVX is not a technological advance. What technology it adds is purely to support marketing. Indeed, nearly the whole argument over DIVX boils down to disagreement over marketing strategy. None of the disadvantages of DIVX you cite in points 3-9,& 11-12 are inherent in the technology - they are the result of a marketing decision - how to "package" the product. I take that into account when deciding to purchase DVD or DIVX releases and am glad to have the choice. Now, I don't have a choice. What I don't understand is why you are so happy about that.
2. Studios make all kinds of decisions about how to release a particular film. Fullscreen or Widescreen, Special Edition/Director's Cut, when to release it, what to charge, etc. If I buy a particular format that you wouldn't choose, so what?
3. Most of these reasons seem to be downright petty to me. I have to make many of the same decisions when I buy a computer, a car, or a fast-food hamburger. I don't suppose that you rejoiced at the downfall of the Arch Deluxe or "New" Coke, did you?
Prior to reading your article and following some of the links, I was not aware of the vehemence of the arguments over DVD/DIVX. This is not Vikings vs. Packers. This is Jihad, the Crusades, PC owners vs. MAC owners.
I can accept a neutral appraisal that those pushing DIVX failed to get the support they needed to make it a viable product. But where they stupid? That is easy to say in retrospect, but then again, history is full of examples of innovations that should never have made it, yet somehow they have. The airplane, the telephone, IBM OS/2, er...oops, well, you know what I mean.
So, what's all the fuss about? Is DVD better than DIVX? Yes and no. All things being equal, DVD has better features, is more portable, compatible, and less intrusive. DIVX is cheaper. Sometimes I want a big steak, sometimes I want a Big Mac. With DIVX, I could get both at the same restaurant.
In buying DIVX, I made a good choice, and with it gone, I have lost nothing except choice. I still have DVD. I won't be able to get new releases on DIVX, but I wouldn't have anyway without DIVX. I still get to view the DIVX titles I have (if I want to) for another two years without the hassle of going out to get a rental or to take it back when I am done. The extra cost of the player is more than made up for in the number of movies I was able to get, some of which I will never watch again. If I really want to keep the movie - I'll have to spend the big bucks on the DVD version, which I would have done anyway.
Was DIVX stupid? Absolutely not. Unfortunately, it didn't work out.
Timothy A. Johnson"

Regardless of anyone's position on this topic, I would like to thank all of you that took the time to respond to my article and visit this site on a regular basis. Debate is Good Thing!
Coming soon, I will have a regular Bulletin Board Forum for you all to post your comments and a variety of topics in Home Electronics.

Just keep visiting, You are all a part of the About.com community.

Previous Features