DVDFab 4.0.1.6 Beta

Fengtao has to support it to remain competitive....

I will disagree. Let's say they can produce a version of DVDFab that is 100 percent stable, will beat any and all copy protection thrown at it, and it burns backup dvd's consistently and it is friendly easy to use, one-click application BUT it will break its support for DVDRebuilder. In other words it will work perfectly and easily for making DVD backups but it won't support DVDRebuilder. You are telling me it won't capture a huge market share?

I hope it will always work with 3rd party applications. But I hardly think it is mandatory to stay competitive.

The point of the DVDFab is to make DVD backups, not work with DVDRebuilder yes?

Saying DVDFab is like analog and DVDRebuilder is like digital is knocking DVDFab down probably a bit much isn't it? I understand your example and don't disagree with the concept, differnent folks have different needs-expecations, but that's what I was talking about before regarding dissing one product that is seen as "inferior" because one product is a bit better. Is DVDRebuilder a bit better? Of course. It is suppose to be. That's what its for. IS DVDFab analog in a digital world? DVDRebuilder a LOT better? DVDFab impaired? No to all three.

Maybe DVDRebuilder needs to get going on defeating copy protection on its own?

Jim

I agree that Fengtao doesn't have to do that. It's his program, however, some portion of his market may chose not to buy his product for that reason or will purchase it and be disappointed if it doesn't. I also agree about getting the existing features working properly before adding new ones.

The actual issue is whether on not DVD Fab is producing files that are "DVD compliant". See Mpucoder's opinion on what constitutes a valid cell on Doom9. There appears to be difference of opinion on the matter.

The older versions 3.1.8.0 and earlier appear to do so (as judged by having cells that weren't just Navpacs). Those version after the introduction of Pathplayer - in some cases appear not to. If it worked before why doesn't it work now? Changes in "cleaning" due to Pathplayer? Only Fengtao or Ting knows and he has chosen not to discuss the issue. Again his right.

Hopefully Fengtao can make every one happy. I don't know how many people choose not to transcode or use a one-stop application. I personally prefer VobBlanker for removing "unwanted stuff". I've tried the "Customize" feature in 4.1.0.6 and was not happy with the result, some things didn't get removed. That wasn't a "biggie" for me so I chose not to bug Fengtao about it.

I feel he has sufficient information and data to allow him to work on the Navpac issue if he so chooses, hence the reason I stopped posting about the issue. Also technically I don't know whether or not cells with no video will affect some DVD players operation. I suspect the answer is no.

Not trying to start a long debate on the question. Ultimately it is something Fengtao and his crew will have to decide as you stated in your post.

Also on the "Maybe DVDRebuilder needs to get going on defeating copy protection on its own?" comment in the last post. DVD-RB has never been intended to "rip" DVDs. I suspect it is a legal issue that author doesn't want to get into IMHO.

Nuff said

rcubedcuber

---

Last edited by rcubedcuber; 10-12-2007 at 04:19. Reason: Add additional comment

I'm talking about DVDFab Platinum. I know HD Decrypter also rips but I use the "Customize" function only avaiable in Platinum.

I may be mistaken here but didn't Rebuilder recently makes it software purposely incompatible with another (unmentioned)decrypter? What other decrypter did you have in mind that would support Rebuilder?

All your opinion. Those are lofty goals you are aspiring to. No program in this field meets your goals. So what's your point? I'm only saying use what you like, leave the developing to the developers and let them run their business the way they see fit.

Changes in "cleaning" due to Pathplayer?

My best mostly untechnical answer is most probably yes. However what you posted does speak to the point of my posts. Pathplayer introduction is a future focus, a good thing of course, on copy protection schemes. I want DVDFab to do what it is suppose to do, allow me to make backup dvd's by defeating copy protection schemes. What IF pathplayer while accomplishing its goal, future proof copy protection schemes, will never articulate happily with 3rd party programs like DVDRebuilder? Do you expect the authors of DVDFab to spend resources and time on getting it to work with DVDRebuilder OR to make sure it defeats copy protection? I want them to focus on defeating copy protection schemes so I can make a backup of my owned DVD's. Or put them on mobile devices that I own. That is why I bought DVDFab.

It seems to me while supporting 3rd party applications is great and again I hope it continues to do so, it is not the primary purpose of DVDab. Lets keep first things first, keep the main thing the main thing. With DVDFab the "main thing" is to make DVD backups by defeating copy protection not articulating with DVDRebuilder. If it does articulate with DVDRebuilder that is outstanding. But hardly THE point of the software.

Trying to have a software that will be all things to all people usually ends up with being something that doesn't work well for anyone.

If DVDFab advertised itself as a "front end" for DVDRebuilder I of course would be way off base. It did not and as far as I can tell has not advertised itself to be so. It has however advertised itself to be a DVD backup and defeat copy protection scheme application. So be that first please.

Get Pathplayer stable for copy protection scheme defeating for backing up DVD's and making files for our mobile devices. THEN do whatever you want in regards to DVDRebuilder. Making sure it works with DVDRebuilder and then getting back to making DVDFab work reliably as advertised has priorities in reverse. Easy to do as the folks "squeaking" about DVDRebuilder are the kinds of folks who will get the "oil". Regardless of how technically more advanced those folks are, and they are, my humble opinion is that the masses who are likely customers and existing customers are not looking for a frontend to DVDRebuilder but rather a stable one click commercial DVD backup program that stays current with copy protection defeating.

Jim

Those are lofty goals you are aspiring to.

Sorry but how is that? Its a "lofty goal" to have the opinion that DVDFab should do what it advertises itself to be? I disagree with your assessment.

"No program in this field meets your goals."

Sorry again but I disagree. DVDFab does.

Are you trying to respond to my posts cd or just trying to be dismissive? Cause it feels a bit like you are trying to move across the line from the subject of the threads to me as a poster. So I just want to check with you there and see what you are trying to accomplish.

didn't Rebuilder recently makes it software purposely incompatible...

Is that true Alan? Wow. Wouldn't that change the nature or context of the issue! I've wondered about IF, and I don't go to the doom forum to know, the users of DVDFab who are making a point of articulation with DVDRebuilder in this forum are also on the DVDRebuilder forum making a point about having it articulate with DVDFab.

Sorry to butt in here but DVDRebuilder is a virtually obsure program in the scheme of things. DVD Fab Platniums main objective in my opinion is to be a stable program that decrypts movies and has options for other things. Sure here on the forum we have all heard of DVD Rebuilder, but 99% of the people that buy this program want it to work from start to finish. Which it does. As for third party applications, if it works with them fine, if it doesn't I think its the responsibility of the third party application to work with DVDFab. Just my opinion. DVD Fab does what is says it does, when it doesn't the author tries his best to accommodate, what more do you want?

Let's stick to the topic: I say that you should use the software you prefer to use. I use DVDFab Platinum because it supports Rebuilder. You say you want DVDFab to be more stable at the expense of what I use it for. I disagree.

If I remember correctly the decision to change the "cleaning" was not arbitrary but done to reduce the A/V sync issues in MPEG-4 conversions in DVD to Mobile in Platinum. Maybe Fengtao thought that this improvement was important enough to risk some problems with 3rd party software that could be corrected (as has been done) as they arose. So far, despite the differing opinions, neither my WinDVD5 installation, nor my standalone player, nor Fengtao's Philips Verifier, nor my copy of The Unofficial DVD Specifications Guide have any problem with video-less cells, and the new checkbox seems to be working on at least some titles for the Rebuilder fans. This looks like a win-win to me.

No. I think you are referring to VOB Blanker. I know Fengtao does not like other software to be named in their forum, but here goes: "AnyDVD" and " CloneDVD2" both support Rebuilder. In fact, the author of Rebuidler has said he uses AnyDVD.

I agree.

You say you want DVDFab to be more stable at the expense of what I use it for. I disagree.

Again not sure what you are talking about. I did not say I want anything done at the expense of why you use the program. I made a point of making sure that is NOT what I said. What do you disagree with? Did DVDFab somewhere indicate it marketed to be a frontend to DVDRebuilder? If you use the program for something outside its purpose I am sorry that it may have an impact on you but if it is outside of the purpose of the program isn't that not really DVDFab's problem nor obligation to support? You are using it knowingly and openly to do something that is outside its stated purpose. Yes?

So basically you are saying that you are using it because it has features that it did not nor has not directly nor primarily promised to provide but you insist on it continuing to provide?

Again I think its great that it does and hope that it continues to do so. But the position that it MUST continue to provide something that is secondary, an added benefit, seems difficult to support. When you purchase the software you do so based on what it advertises itself to be. Did it say it would be a front end for applications like DVDRebuilder or not? I can't find anywhere that it did/does. That does not mean I am correct of course. I just don't see it anywhere. Can you point me to the features list somewhere that says it will?

Jim

We can all agree to disagree. Lets just keep the tone of the thread friendly here okay. The program was written for the masses, if it has not made everyone happy , well thats software. All in all it is one of the most popular programs being developed and it will continue to be developed to the best of the authors capabilities. I think that sums it up. Everyone have a Happy Holiday.

thought that this improvement...

I think Pathplayer is an improvement by the way. Anything that positions the software for future usability is a good thing despite having to work on some of the bugs.....

keep the tone of the thread friendly here okay....

If I said anything unfriendly I certainly didn't mean to. Trying my best to keep everything friendly and straightforward. Being straightforward is not being unfriendly. I hope I didn't post anything unfriendly.

No program out there will do this b/c protections are changed and new versions come out.

b/c protections are changed....

Yes I understand that. Which is why I have DVDFab. It promises to stay current with defeating them as they are introduced. My expectation is that it will stay current. Not that a particular version will do so from that moment into the future.

No and neither did I.

And it is, that is why it is such a popular program. How many other programs can you say stay up to date with copy protections and have such great support and features, maybe one?

and I don't go to the doom forum to know....

Well I decided to take a look as see for myself. Have to say I guess I don't understand why some of the folks posting here about DVDRebuilder are even on this forum. Man, talk about nothing good to say about someone... seems like some of them have nothing good to say about the authors of DVDFab nor the program in their posts on DOOM. They start out by bashing no response to the DVDRebuilder issue and the next breath bashing the useless cell feature. So if there was no response to the issue just how did the useless cell option show up?

If you are going to consistently bash someone and a product on one forum, and then come here to posts, what is your actual point of being here on this forum? Hard to see how there is any intention of being a positive voice, even constructive criticism, here on this forum.

Some of these folks obviously know what they are talking about technically. Quite impressive in fact. But if they don't like DVDFab, and its pretty obvious they have "issues" with it and the authors, then what positive contribution can they make here? You have every right to like what you like, dislike what you dislike. Just seems a bit disengenious to be posting here.

Jim

Met,

Just checking but you do understand I'm not dissing DVDFab right? You don't have to convince me its a great program. I'm already a supporter.

Jim

Never said you were, but you are complaining about it not being "stable". And I'm not trying to convince you anything, what you think is what you think.

Just to answer your question: It was Vob Blanker that was made incompatable with AnyDVD. And AnyDVD is the other decrypter that works with Rebuilder.