1st a reminder that like other Aiseesoft Blu-Ray apps, this GOTD adds a modified driver in xp [& possibly Vista] so Windows will read the UDF 2.5 Blu-Ray uses. Google "remove thdudf.sys" [without quotes] if you have problems afterwards -- in XP Pro it provides no benefit for me & does cause problems but your mileage will vary, & of course it's unneeded in win7.
----------
Why bother with Blu-Ray?...
There are all sorts of reasons to dislike Blu-Ray, but for many [most?] people it remains the only way to watch a movie in really nice quality HD -- that said, in our experience most movies on Blu-Ray aren't any better than an up-sampled DVD. There are also lots of reasons to make a copy of any Blu-Ray discs you buy -- providing it's legal where you live -- including protecting your investment as Blu-Ray discs seem more easily damaged than DVDs or CDs.
Now there are 2 hurtles to making a copy of your Blu-Ray discs -- the major hurtle of course is the usually quite heavy DRM, but very often you must also re-encode the movie so it will fit on a 25 GB BD disc or a DVD... you can buy 50 GB blank discs, but they're still more expensive [$4 - $15 each at Newegg this morning]. And yes, while your mileage will vary, Google & you'll find plenty of people who feel they can maintain the original quality [or come Very close to it] putting Blu-Ray format video on a [often dual layer] DVD.
Why MKV?...
On a Blu-Ray disc the [usually AVC/H.264] video's in one or more .m2ts container files, which can be a hassle to work with -- lots of software won't handle .m2ts, at least without errors like dropped frames &/or audio sync problems. The MKV format is superior as an alternative -- AVI is iffy, MOV most often won't work, & less software handles .264 than .m2ts. MultiAVCHD is the leading free app to put your video into the Blu-Ray format so you can burn it [it's also more popular than a Lot of payware alternatives], and it likes importing MKV. [Once you convert (re-encode) the video .avi, .mov, mp4 etc. may be fine.]
Aiseesoft BD to MKV Copy does just that, copies the video to your hard drive. You can use the MKV as-is, since there are several nice players that'll handle it very well, or you can use that as the starting point to a conversion. Working with video means a lot of trade-offs or compromises, with most every plus accompanied by a minus. That includes the software you use. Generally easier & faster mean lower quality results that don't always match what you really wanted. But easier & faster are easier & faster, so if that's what you prefer you might be happier with Aiseesoft's Blu-Ray Ripper Ultimate -- otherwise you can probably do better using BD to MKV Copy & trading some of your time & effort for more ideal results. [That's not BTW saying anything bad about Aiseesoft's ripper, but just rippers & converters in general.]
[Re]encoding Blu-Ray video...
If you're re-encoding to a smaller frame size AVC/H.264 to stick on a cell phone many of the ffmpeg-based converters [and rippers] out of China do a fine job quickly. For tablets I prefer Nero's Recode. If you're encoding for DVDs you want an app that will let you do variable bit rate, & in the US [or anywhere they use NTSC], ideally that app will also let you use something called pulldown, keeping the actual video at 24 fps [you'll often see 23.976, which may or may not be interchangeable depending on the app] & inserting flags to repeat frames to = 29.976 fps. [Note: Research (Google) & you'll find some people swear by constant bit rate DVD video -- they've just never used a decent variable bit rate encoder. When you've got a file size limit, it makes good, logical sense to allocate a higher bit rate (& larger amount of data) to the scenes that need it most. Likewise you'll find folks that are ignorant of or maybe scoff at pulldown -- why make the file larger by writing/storing duplicate frames when with a simple instruction (flag) included in the file, the player will simply show the same frames twice?]
Encoding video for a Blu-Ray player can be a bit of an extra hassle depending on the software you use to put your audio & video into the format you'll burn to disc. Long story short, your choice of Blu-Ray authoring app may lock you into using that app's encoder. Lots of Blu-Ray authoring software includes compliance testing, intended to make sure your video will work on most every Blu-Ray player in existence -- if you use one of those apps [rather than multiAVCHD] most often it will insist on encoding your video, even if you just got done encoding it using something else. Worse, these same authoring apps often limit you to using certain templates [profiles] for Blu-Ray that are included in the program, or else it'll again re-encode your video, & they may prevent or limit changing any Blu-Ray template settings.
If you decide to use multiAVCHD, or some other authoring app that doesn't include compliance checking, the leading free AVC/H.264 encoder is X264, which is included in ffmpeg. Encoding HD AVC video is slow no matter what soft & hardware you use, & X264 includes a setting that trades quality for speed. Software *X* may set X264 to encode at max speed, sacrificing quality, while app *Y* takes the opposite approach, favoring quality over speed. You can access the full range of speed settings if you use X264 from the command line, or if you use one of the X264 front ends [GUIs] like Avanti, but if you'd rather use a video converter app you'll have to compare them to see what works for you, what gives you the quality levels you're after at a speed you can live with.
GPU assist...
Graphics processors specialize in a different sort of calculations than CPUs, so they can be a great help crunching numbers on Wall St., cracking passwords, & sometimes processing video. When it comes to video, using a GPU is both finicky & tricky... Say you have 2 PCs, both with the same hardware, GPU assist may work on one, while it fails using the same software on the 2nd -- trying to figure out why is the subject of many, Many online discussions &/or threads. Some things are done faster by the GPU rather than the CPU, but you very often sacrifice quality -- the quality loss can be even greater if/when the software is written to use maximum speed vs. quality. And here's the tricky part -- reading, decoding the video, then splitting the processing between the CPU & GPU, then writing the results to disk creates bottlenecks, so GPU assist may take a load off the CPU, but may or may not do anything to increase the overall speed of a video conversion. Whether it's worth it or not depends on your hardware, installed software, the original or source video, & the app you're using. Bear in mind that just reading [decoding] 1080p video is no easy task, so a bit of [often DirectX] GPU assist there can be as helpful, maybe even more so, as an assist encoding that video... pay attention to overall quality & speed as you try out & compare software & settings -- GPU-Z may show an encoding app *really* using your GPU, but how long the job actually takes & its quality level is what's important.
FWIW I use an Intel-based board that includes Virtu, & as possible use ffdshow & LAVFilters for their use of Intel's OpenCL. What that means is that hopefully video software will use the graphics portion of my CPU to assist decoding/playing HD video, along with my ATI graphics card's OpenCL drivers for their assist processing & encoding that video. I don't think anything's faster than using Intel's OpenCL but capabilities are limited. When everything works together it's fast [the fastest I've seen anyway], but it's also broken several times towards the end of last year -- I'm afraid to change anything without a full backup -- & compatibility problems are expected [e.g. I have to install the LAVFilters for some jobs, then uninstall them for others]. And I've been pretty lucky -- LOTs of video folks are pulling their hair out because of GPU assist. Just a bit of a reality check to balance all the hype.
