What ways can I stream audio and video online to my audience?

December 30th, 2006

There are three ways of getting audio and video files (which are usually very large) to the end user:

1. Download - Download the entire file over the Internet, save it to the user’s machine, and then play it from the hard disk. Requires users to sit through a download that can take quite a bit of time for average broadband home connections. I’ve seen many people get impatient for “blind” downloaded media content and abandon the download altogether. Downloading digital media is not a good experience for the audience.

2. Progressive Download - Download part of the file, and start playing the file as the last part of it downloads. The file is saved locally, as if it were downloaded, but playback begins before the download finishes. This method can be very inefficient if many users are attempting to consume your media. Network congestion often times makes the audience sit through minutes of rebuffering.

3. Streaming - Play the file directly from the network as it gets to the machine. This method never saves the file to the local hard disk. The media content is delivered “just in time” for playback. A good streaming media server is going to cache the content and give an optimized experience based on the users connection speed, and should start up very quickly after your audience requests it.

GravityLab uses a streaming media back end infrastructure on a state of the art content delivery network to ensure you are getting the most most for your money with audio hosting and video hosting.

Windows Media audio and video content for Mac / Apple

December 27th, 2006

Telestream announced an agreement by which Microsoft will now distribute Windows Media® Components for QuickTime. Powered by Telestream’s Flip4Mac technology, the Windows Media components enable Mac OS X users to play Windows Media video and audio directly within the familiar QuickTime Player. The components are now available as a free-of-charge download from Microsoft’s website at:

Download Windows Media Player for Mac (Flip4Mac)

The new product allows Quicktime Player to play Windows Media. From the Microsoft website:

With Windows Media® Components for QuickTime, by Flip4Mac™, you can play Windows Media files (.wma and .wmv) directly in QuickTime Player and view Windows Media content on the Internet using a Web browser.

Supported Audio Codecs:

Windows Media Audio 9
Windows Media Audio 9 Professional
Windows Media Audio 9 Lossless
ISO MPEG Layer 3 (MP3)
Microsoft G.726
Microsoft IMA ADPCM
Microsoft G.711 aLaw
Microsoft G.711 uLaw
Microsoft ADPCM

Supported Video Codecs

Windows Media Video 9 Advanced Profile
Windows Media Video 9
Windows Media Video 8
Windows Media Video 7
ISO MPEG-4, versions 1.0 and 1.1
Microsoft MPEG-4, versions 2 and 3
Microsoft Motion JPEG

“Consumers and content professionals are demanding great ways to view Windows Media content on the Macintosh using the platform and tools they know,” said Kevin Unangst, director of the Windows Digital Media Division at Microsoft. “The Windows Media® Components for QuickTime, powered by Telestream’s Flip4Mac technology provide this important capability and live up to Telestream’s reputation for outstanding media solutions.”

”Microsoft’s decision to offer Flip4Mac technology as a Windows Media playback option is a tribute to the benefits of our QuickTime-based solution for Mac users,” said Dan Castles, CEO of Telestream. “It underscores Microsoft’s confidence in Telestream and our Flip4Mac brand. In just one year’s time, Flip4Mac has achieved tremendous success and acceptance by both Apple enthusiasts and partners. We’re delighted that the broader Mac community will gain easier access to an enhanced Windows Media playback experience on the Mac as well as exposure to our additional Windows Media tools for the Mac.”

With the proliferation of Windows Media content on the Internet today, the potential community of Macintosh users wanting to play that content is expanding. This includes the consumer who wants to view streaming news, movie trailers and home movies, the casual weekend videographer, and the serious video professional.

The Windows Media® Components for QuickTime add Windows Media playback support to the QuickTime Player and Safari web browser. Once installed, it allows Mac users to view Windows Media video and audio content from within their existing QuickTime applications. It also provides the first solution for full playback of high definition Windows Media on a Mac. Other Flip4Mac Windows Media components provide the ability to import for editing and export Windows Media from within QuickTime-based applications.

The free-of-charge Windows Media® Component for QuickTime is also available for download at www.flip4mac.com

Streaming media help - General FAQ’s and advice for getting the audio or video stream to work

December 27th, 2006

Q: Was is rebuffering?
A: Given the complexity of the Internet, it’s not unusual for short-lived problems to crop on somewhere in the system. Try connecting again in a minute or two. If your problem mysteriously disappears and never returns, great. If it recurs, especially if you can reproduce it consistently, it’s worth hunting down and solving.

Q: Is your internet connection sufficient?
A: If you’re trying to connect to the uncompressed stream, you’ll need a pretty fast connection (DSL, cable modem, dual ISDN, full T-1, LAN, etc) and even then the stream quality will depend on how busy the network is. If you have a modem, sorry, you’re not well-connected enough to hear the uncompressed stream; give the others a try. If you have a slow modem (14.4 or older), you may very well have trouble getting those too.

Q: Is your ISP ok?
A: Internet Service Providers periodically have to do maintenance or troubleshooting on their equipment, which can cause connection problems. ISP’s are not perfect, nor do they know everything all the time; if you’re having trouble and can’t figure out why, you may wish to contact them and let them know.

Q: Is your software current?
A: Go to http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com and click on Product Update. If there are any critical updates or new versions of Windows Media Player, install them and try connecting to the stream again.

Q: Is your computer fast enough?
If you have lots of other programs open, or very powerful programs, they may be eating too much processor time and/or RAM for the player to work properly. If your computer is old, it might be too slow to play the stream regardless of what else it’s doing.

Q: Does the stream do nothing but buffer endlessly?
A: The player needs a certain amount of music buffered before it feels comfortable about playing the music. If it doesn’t have enough network bandwidth to buffer that much, it will just keep trying and trying to buffer that much. Things that could keep you from having enough bandwidth include:

* A network connection that’s just too darn slow (such as a 14.4 modem)
* Too many things using the network (ie. ftp’ing something AND surfing the web AND listening to an audio stream AND using Napster AND etc.)
* Too many people using the network (ie. Jimmy using it AND Sally using it AND Timmy using it AND you using it)

Q: Is the audio out of whack? (Left/right switched, missing one side, no vocals, etc.)

A: If you’re experiencing this sort of issue, you’ll probably want to check your speaker setup. Make sure your left speaker is on the left and the right is on the right. Make sure both speakers are fully plugged in and that their cables are in decent shape (not frayed or cracking or cut). Make sure your audio settings are all normal. If you can set the volume for left and right channel separately, check to see that one isn’t set drastically differently from the other, or muted.

Q: Is the audio distorted?
A: If the audio is sheering and fuzzy, the volume is probably too high somewhere. The first two things to check would be system volume and speaker volume. System volume should be in your control panels, speaker volume should be somewhere on your speakers. Try setting both to fairly low levels and increase as necessary.

Q: Does the stream seem to play normally, but there’s no audio?
A: Assuming of course that you’ve made sure your speakers have power, are plugged into your computer, are turned on and aren’t broken, check to make sure there’s actually audio being received. You can do this by viewing a “visualization” in Windows Media Player and RealPlayer, or by watching the graphic EQ in WinAMP. If this is moving and changing like there’s music there, you’ll probably want to check your computer’s sound settings and your soundcard installation.

Q: Does the wrong player come up when you start a stream?
A: When you install a media player, it will often try to “claim” a lot of media types for itself, so when you try to play music or videos of those types, that player will automatically start up and play it. Thus, unless you tell it not to, the media player you most recently installed will be the default player for most of the types. You can set these in the following places:

WinAMP - Options:Preferences
WinMediaPlayer - Tools:Options:Formats
RealPlayer - View:Preferences:Upgrade:Media Types

Q: Does it say that the stream cannot be opened or found?
This will often call itself Error #404, by the way. Try one of the other U of O streams. If the second stream is up, then the first stream is temporarily down. You can contact streaming support to get an idea of when it will be back up. Another thing to check is whether or not you can connect to anything. Try viewing some random website (www.mtv.com www.slashdot.org, whatever). If that fails as well, your network connection is probably dead. Make sure all your cables are plugged in, wait a few minutes and try again; it might have been a temporary hiccup. If it persists, you may wish to contact your Internet Service Provider.

If you can get other places on the web but not the streams, try viewing other content of the same type (Real, Windows Media, etc.). If you can’t view that either, you may be behind a firewall, a gadget that prevents certain types of network connections. Your local network guru should know whether or not this is the case. If you can view other media content and still can’t get the U of O streams, you may want to check the U of O website for any possible announcements about maintenance.

Q: I think I’m behind a firewall or using Internet security software, how could that affect my connection?
A: A firewall is used to block unwanted traffic from your network and/or computer. If you are on a university or corporate network, check with your Network Administrator or ISP to make sure that they have your firewall configured to allow streaming media content to be viewed. Tell them that you need port 80 open and if possible UDP ports 4040 and 7007.

If you have your own software or hardware firewall installed, please refer to the documentation that shipped with the product or visit that company’s web site for more information.

Q: I have a software/hardware firewall installed on my computer/network, can I still listen to streaming audio?
A: If you are behind a software or hardware firewall, you may have trouble with streaming media content. To overcome this problem, you will need to connect to the broadcast site from outside the firewall or configure the firewall to allow streaming media access from within your network.

Window Media Player firewall information:

You will need to either connect to the broadcast site from outside of the firewall or open TCP Port 80 (HTTP) which allows Windows Media streaming. If you continue to experience problems, follow these steps:

Start Windows Media Player - Select File/Properties/Advanced - Verify that at the bottom of the page the HTTP option is checked - In the server field enter the name of your proxy server (e.g. proxy.company.com) - In the port field enter the port your proxy server listens on ( 80 or 8080 are common ). - Select OK and close the Windows Media Player

RealPlayer firewall information:
You will need to either connect to the broadcast site from outside of the firewall or open TCP Port 7070 which supports audio & video streaming. RealPlayer automatically selects the most efficient transport for your network without any intervention and therefore is not accessible to the user.

Q: I do not have any firewall issues, but I still can’t connect or the stream continuously buffers?
A: If you have previously connected to the stream but are currently experiencing problems, try clearing your History and Cache in your browser. Open Internet Explorer/Netscape/Opera and choose Tools -> Internet Options -> General -> Clear Temporary Internet Files and Clear History

 

How to create a video podcast

December 27th, 2006

In 2006 there was a marked upswing in the use of video podcasting as a method of distributing multimedia content including audio and video . Video podcasting have been used by a cross-section of traditional and non-traditional media, from major TV networks, cable, and public television stations to software companies, movie studios, and intriguing upstarts like AskaANinja.com, Happy Tree Friends, and Channel Frederator.

Podcasting allows anyone to distribute free or paid media to the content hungry masses. With a few simple technology tools and a PC or Mac, you too can create a video podcast in 3 easy steps.

Overview
Anyone with a few pieces of technology and broadband can create their own channel, pump out content around the world, and join the ranks of the new media moguls. The same technology that has allowed individuals to build their own mini-media empires has also given corporations and established media brands new avenues for leveraging existing content and building new revenue streams.

Just one year ago, audio podcasting was taking its wobbly baby steps. Now, it’s an accepted form of new media delivery (see StreamingMedia.com’s assessment of podcasting from April 2005 here). The same scenario is occurring with video and will probably have an even bigger impact than audio. So how do we use video podcasting as a helpful tool in our streaming media arsenal?

Step 1: Produce It

There are several ways to capture your media, the two most common being taking existing content off the shelf or shooting it using a digital video camera. You can even use a webcam, and most digital still cameras have a video record feature. On a Mac with Final Cut Pro or iMovie you can capture videos off of a camera, or you can drag and drop your existing AVI, MOV, or other video file into your video-editing program. On a PC, you can use Adobe Premiere Pro or similar software to capture raw footage onto the computer.

After editing and adding any additional titles, credits, etc. it’s time to output your video into a podcasting friendly format. Most content is either viewed in a browser/media player on a computer or downloaded to a portable media device (iPod, Creative Zen, Archos, etc.). For the purpose of this article, let’s render a video out for an iPod, which is also a standard output for some of the online distribution channels. In iMovie, Final Cut Pro, or QuickTime on a Mac you can simply export to iPod format, which is 320×240 at 30 frames per second in a QuickTime MPEG-4 file. On a PC you will want to render out using Adobe Premiere or similar video software to a 320×240 AVI or MPEG video file. There are a host of free or inexpensive converters at www.download.com or www.tucows.com that can convert AVIs or MPEGs to an iPod-friendly MPEG-4. Once your content is in the right format its time to post.

Step 2: Post It
With myriad ways to deliver your content, you want to make sure you are using the proper channel for distribution. Video podcasting content can be protected by hosting the content internally and using a variety of formatting procedures to protect from downloads. The current trend by major content providers is to provide media with fewer restrictions and advertisements for revenue streams. Other strong channels for content are TV advertisements and other clips that are specifically designed to be spread virally.

Most video podcast content is designed to be downloaded and spread virally, so we will look at some free methods to spread your content. New media outlets like YouTube and Google Video let you post your video content free of charge and simply paste a link into your website or blog. Easy, quick, and free, it’s no wonder we are seeing video podcasting take off. If you want to post your video and have it available for an iPod or to download onto a portable media device, you can simply upload your file to a server and post a link. More and more Fortune 1000 companies are posting marketing-related material in iPod-friendly formats to download, view, and share.

Step 3: Deliver It
The final step in the process is to actually distribute your content; technically your video does not become a podcast until it has an RSS feed attached to it. Most blogging software has RSS feed capability built in and will have your video podcast up and running in no time. Once you post your content online, simply copy and paste the embed code given by YouTube, Google Video, etc., or the link to your hosted file, and paste that into a new post on your blog.

Submit your RSS feed to iTunes and a host of other video podcasting services, and your video blog, or vlog, is up and running. Using a free feed service like FeedBurner can help you maximize your usage of links, tags, and images in iTunes so your content is easily searchable. Every time you post a new video, FeedBurner updates your RSS feed and alerts the distribution channels and your subscribers of your new content.

Final Thoughts
With any new technology, there is a learning and adoption curve so choose your content and the target audience for this new medium with care. Keep it short, simple, and easy to spread. This has been a very brief introduction to this process with the basics on how to get started. There are plenty of resources available for more detailed information on how to add more options and customize a process that will work for you. As part of a new media strategy, video podcasting and vlogging are incredible tools in the quest for additional revenue streams and more customers. With any luck, and a little help from you, vlog could be the word of the year for 2006.

The business of streaming media hosting

December 27th, 2006

Tom Keller had a problem. His Bluegrass on Broad Street program had just reached a milestone, streaming the last night of a summer music series on the Web with both audio and video, and the audience response—both physical and virtual—had been better than expected.

But his plans to expand beyond the local area and its crowds of thousands to introduce his hometown of Kingsport, Tennessee—and his hot dog shop where the whole series started—came to an abrupt halt when faced with the minimum costs presented by the streaming service providers contacted in the wake of his initial success.

“The minimum dollar amount I could find was around $1,000 per month,” Keller says, “and I only make about $2,600 during that same period of time on the show, after paying the bands and factoring in food costs in the hot dog shop. I’d love to do this, but the minimums don’t make business sense for me.”
Keller’s story is typical of the catch-22 faced by small businesses and startups that want to use the Web to get the word out, often in unique ways, but cannot afford the price of entry. They also often cannot afford the price of success: should their marketing content catch the interest of even a small percentage of the Internet audience, the costs associated with meeting the audio and video hosting demand can be staggering. As demand for a particular piece of video content spikes, small businesses may find themselves faced with a Hobson’s choice of shutting down their own servers and risking a customer backlash or paying a Tier 1 or 2 CDN a significant amount of money to handle the spike.

During interviews conducted for this article, Content Delivery Network representatives acknowledged the issues facing small customers, and at the same time offered potential workarounds that meet the needs of both the small business owner and the Content Delivery Network.

We’ll explore the suggestions provided by CDN representatives later in the article, but first let’s look at the hurdles.

Crossing the Chasm

Small businesses hoping to use streaming as an effective marketing and sales tool face six hurdles, each of which must be addressed in order to understand the total cost of small-scale streaming. The hurdles are listed in logical order and include the following:

- Format choice (for production and streaming)
- Production value
- Conversion process
- Compliance (508, closed captioning, etc.)
- Distribution
- Tracking

Format Choice

The advent of digital video was supposed to lessen the confusion about formats; instead, small business owners find themselves facing a wide variety of digital audio and video formats, some of which are good for acquisition or production and some of which are best used for streaming. As a rule of thumb, video captured in the MiniDV format (also known as DV25) on a three-chip camera is often more than adequate for editing and conversion purposes. In fact, in good light, many single-chip DV consumer cameras provide acceptable video quality, although the audio quality on these cameras can be somewhat lacking.

For streaming media hosting formats, four primary options are available: QuickTime (led by the new high-quality codec called H.264 or AVC), Real, Microsoft Windows Media, and newcomer Flash 8 (or VP6, as it is referred to by its license holder, On2 Technologies). Each of these options provides acceptable or exceptional video at various data rates and can be used for either streaming or progressive downloads. DivX is another up-and-coming codec that can be used for progressive downloads as well as select DVD playback.

Production

While many small businesses choose to have a professional graphics designer create their logo, letterhead, and business cards—the general “look and feel” of their business—these same business owners often resort to in-house creation of brochures, flyers, and other printed materials that use the same professionally-designed logo in a less-than-professional appearance. This is often done because the perceived value of a professionally designed brochure, flyer, or poster is outweighed by the cost.

This same cost issue is exacerbated when it comes to video hosting projects; too often “Uncle Joe” is called in to create an inexpensive and, inadvertently, unprofessional marketing or advertising tool. The content may look acceptable to the business owner when it is viewed on its own but completely unacceptable to the same business owner when viewed side by side with other commercials or advertising.

This side-by-side comparison is not merely an act of aestheticism: the early computer truism garbage in, garbage out also applies in streaming. For every 3 dB of noise (or snow in layperson’s video terms), the size of the streaming video file is increased twofold. So, for small businesses, it really pays to invest in proper production values up front.

Conversion

Once production is complete, most videos are still in an editable format, such as MiniDV or MPEG-2; unfortunately, these formats are often 10–50 times larger than the average viewer’s available streaming media bandwidth. Until recently, the cost of programs that compress the videos down to manageable levels for streaming was prohibitive for small businesses that did only a few videos per month or quarter. While professional-level conversion programs such as Sorenson’s Squeeze, Autodesk’s Cleaner, or Popwire’s CompressionMaster are still the best choice for conversion, a recent spate of free or open-source applications have changed the playing field, offering acceptable conversions from MiniDV. Additionally, many open-source programs marketed as DVD- or movie-ripping tools work equally well for converting MPEG-2 to streaming media formats.

Compliance

Little is mentioned, outside of high-end Web development firms or government institutions, about 508 compliance or other aids for the visually impaired. Yet a growing number of businesses, including small businesses, would benefit a portion of their customer base by adding closed captioning and other visual aids to their streaming and Web presence. Don’t be surprised if mandatory 508 compliance spreads beyond government Web sites, the only U.S. group currently required to provide these visual aids.

Distribution

Some small businesses will distribute their audio and video content through the mail (or FedEx or UPS) on videotape or DVD. But this trend is decreasing as potential customers come to rely on the Web to get their information about products and services. In fact, an article by this author in the 2005 Streaming Media Industry Sourcebook that noted nascent industries that would soon use video streaming to drive an uptick in customer purchases—such as the travel industry—is already outdated; almost every major travel Web site has shifted to online accessibility to its previously mailed video content.

As noted at the beginning of this article, however, streaming distribution is a “great unknown” for small businesses. Each CDN interviewed for this article mentioned that their customer base spans from mid-size to large companies but that they are actively pursuing business models that would suit small businesses. They do so with hopes of growing the business opportunity from today’s startup businesses.

Nine Systems’ Helen Tse sums up the forward-thinking CDN’s approach to small-business clients. Sounding more like a savvy small business banker than a CDN exec, Tse notes that her company benefits from the “fresh set of eyes” and excitement small business customers bring to the Content Delivery Network.

“After many years of being jaded by the companies that believe they know it all and change streaming providers like clothes—always chasing the lowest price per GB—we are able to see from newbies’ eyes how incredibly beneficial and useful streaming media has become and the value our company offers in enabling these clients to leverage streaming media easily to add value to their daily business,” says Tse. “These small businesses appreciate this value and customer service we provide and they remember it when they have become above-average streaming opportunities where every streaming company in the country is trying to get their business.”

Tracking

For all the benefits of streaming media and Web delivery of rich media audio and video content, very few businesses—large or small—successfully use tracking tools to monitor the effectiveness of their distributed content. Hit rates and viewership on the Web will typically be significantly lower than for traditional mediums, but targeted responses and demographic tracking will conversely be significantly higher. The Web can provide an effective marketing bargain for small businesses only if used with granular visit-and-response measurement tools that are not available for traditional marketing or advertising mediums such as television, radio, or newspapers.

Roll Your Own

For the adventurous (or frugal, as the case may be), low- or no-cost streaming servers now have the capability to handle select or even multiple file formats. Three of the better-known projects are Real’s HelixServer, VideoLAN’s VLC, and Unreal Streaming Technologies’ Media Server.

HelixServer is an open-source project based on the Helix DNA architecture, although a commercial license is also available (and required for Real Audio, Real Video, and Helix DRM—digital rights management—modules). Up until the most recent branch (version 11.0), Helix could be hosted on a non-server Windows machine, as well as FreeBSD and AIX. Under version 11.0, the server now requires Linux 2.6, Solaris 9/10, Red Hat Enterprise, or—for Windows users—Windows Server 2003, which may put Helix’s total cost of ownership out of reach for the average small business.

VideoLAN’s VLC (the acronym comes from its early player-only incarnation, the VideoLAN Client) is also available under an open-source license and takes a unique approach. VLC is primarily used as a video player but also has transcoding capabilities, which, in essence, allow users to change both formats or codecs as well as the data rate at which a video file can be delivered and serve them up to other viewers (albeit at a lower quality for lower data rates). VideoLAN provides an overview on their Web site of how to turn any VLC-equipped machine (with the exception of the PDA version) into a video server.

Unreal Streaming Technologies has taken a balanced approach with its Media Server. The company notes that “existing media servers, such as Microsoft and RealNetworks servers, are expensive and difficult to install and operate.” To counteract that approach, UST notes that Media Server “is the result of our work aimed to provide a powerful, reliable, secure, and completely free multimedia delivery system.” The popularity of the Unreal Media Server for commercial uses, though, has led Unreal, upon release of its version 4.0 Media Server, to modify its licensing agreement to strike a balance that benefits small businesses.

“While we want to keep Unreal Media Server available and free for home users and small businesses, we require larger companies that heavily use our product to purchase a license for unlimited version,” the company’s Web site notes. “The free version of Unreal Media Server has a limitation of 15 concurrent connections. This is more than enough for home and small business networks, therefore most of the users are not affected by this limitation.”

Tips and Tricks

When asked about the “why and wherefore” of small business streaming, each company interviewed gave several pointers.

Todd Loewenstein of Arcostream noted, first and foremost, that small business really doesn’t differ in its needs from its larger comrades. “Small companies have many of the same needs for streaming as larger companies—things like marketing, product info, and customer contact,” says Loewenstein. “But these small business don’t have the capital expenditure that larger companies do that build out their own server farms.”

Loewenstein noted that, while the average small business customer consumes approximately $1,000 of services per month just like other customers, the sales cycle with small customers is shorter “since they don’t need budgetary approval like a big company does.” This suggests that a small company might press for a lower price in return for a significantly shortened sales cycle; the decision, however, is completely up to the CDN, as all CDN representatives say they have to balance lower fees with equal or higher education and training for small customers versus their larger customers.

Martin Hayward of Mirror Image suggests another model that may help small businesses: the content aggregator.

“When we get inquiries from small companies and they ask about our services and what the cost is, we do mention that our minimum fee is $1,000 per month,” says Hayward. “If they can’t afford the cost, we never just turn those small companies away; we’ll do whatever we can to recommend someone else that can possibly help provide them with a solution, including content aggregators.”

An aggregator buys the minimum chunks of bandwidth or storage space from a CDN and then sells it in smaller chunks at a higher rate.

“Streaming media is still, in our opinion, in its infancy,” says Jerry Scheibeler, vice president of sales for Nine Systems, one of the leading content aggregators. “We’ve only scratched the surface of the number of clients that will be using streaming media as a primary form of communication, training, marketing, and media distribution in the future. Aggregation has worked well in the discount Web hosting market and we have no reason to expect that it will not be a part of the larger CDN picture for streaming media.”

To further address the needs of small businesses that are able to afford the $1,000 minimum, some CDNs are looking to pricing models from other industries. Mirror Image has created an innovative pricing plan based on the cell phone industry. Called the TotalValuePlan, this Mirror Image service allows for “rollover minutes” that reward long-term small business customers with the flexibility of moving minutes from month to month.

Another tip offered by at least two CDN representatives is leveraging innovative streaming content to appeal to the CDN’s desire for publicity. I faced a similar problem during a benefit concert held for Hurricane Katrina victims on Labor Day in 2005. When an article about the benefit concert appeared, listing the URL of the stream, the interest in the concert from around the world caused bandwidth usage to jump dramatically. Sonic Foundry, whose product was used to record the concert, heard about the concert and offered to host the content free of charge; Sonic Foundry even wrote a press release about the event and the use of their product, which further drove interest in the streaming content.

Mirror Image’s Hayward shares a similar story. Noting that CDNs need compelling content that they can tout to select markets they’re targeting, he noted that Mirror Image stepped up to host content that was about to receive enormous attention.

“Early in 2005, Mirror Image hosted a series of clips for a Norwegian company called the Active Child Aid Foundation,” says Hayward. “The company produced a film titled The Children of Leningrad, which was up for an Academy Award in February 2005. Mirror Image delivered the video for the company to offload the expected traffic their Web site was going to see as a result of the Academy Awards. We did this at no cost as a way to provide exposure to the plight of these children and the filmmakers who were chronicling their plight.” (It goes without saying that Mirror Image also received exposure from the arrangement.)

Dan Ushman, head of operations at midPhase—a discount Web hosting company—says his best advice for small businesses that want to stream is to start small. In many cases, the small organization will find that a Web hosting service is the right middle ground between hosting their own content and partnering with a CDN.

“People sometimes have really big eyes,” says Ushman, “and ask for dedicated servers and rates starting in the $1,000-plus monthly range. We can usually provide dedicated machines in the $150 per month range that would be more than adequate for the small business that wants to test the waters of streaming.”

Summary

Streaming video is growing in all sizes of business—multinational, mid-sized, and small. Options for small businesses to use streaming for advertising and marketing are also expanding, but a small business needs to know how to adequately address the growth potential and initial phases of its streaming endeavors. Streaming service providers understand that small business customers have the potential to turn into large business customers, so each provider offers a unique approach to meeting the demands of the growing segment of small businesses seeking rich media tools for marketing and advertising.

Streaming Media Players - market share for video codecs

December 27th, 2006

The demand for streaming media players such as Windows Media and Quicktime has long represented the front lines for companies engaged in the codec wars. Since the results of most side-by-side video and media comparisons are subjective and qualitative at best, Microsoft, Apple, Real, Macromedia, and DivX have touted how many times their respective media players have been downloaded to convince content providers that using their codecs will offer the biggest potential streaming media audience. On the surface, this logic makes sense, but the reality is much more complicated than what you might expect.

To begin with, the metrics cited usually give the total number of downloads rather than the number of unique users. Plus, they rarely mention whether the amount reflects new downloads or established users upgrading to the latest version. If the number refers to the last two versions of a media player, then one user can easily equal a half-dozen downloads when you take into account a laptop, home desktop, and work computer.

On top of this, the numbers often only count streaming media downloads from the company’s Web site. Considering the fact that many of these players have myriad distribution channels outside of the company’s own site, most of the market penetration numbers that you read are, in and of themselves, next to useless. For instance, many web sites that have streaming media video available on their sites provide download to the video players they utilize.

But that’s not to say that there’s no value in taking media player market penetration into consideration when choosing a codec; you just need a little perspective. This article takes a look at five major media players—Windows Media Player, QuickTime, RealPlayer, Macromedia Flash Player, and DivX—with an eye towards what these numbers represent and what effect recent news may have on the global outlook for video player penetration.

Quicktime

A prime example of the caveats associated with taking download numbers at face value can be found in the purported 250 million downloads of the QuickTime player. “The only distribution numbers that we track are platform,” says Frank Casanova, Apple’s senior director of product marketing for the interactive media group. “When people come to our site they declare if they want the PC or Mac version.” Casanova cites the fact that 98% of the downloads are the PC version as evidence of QuickTime’s universal adoption, but the fact that Apple doesn’t track individual users renders the 250 million downloads meaningless.

But this doesn’t negate the veracity of the number nearly as much as the fact that 250 million actually only represents a small slice of the total number of Quicktime video players in circulation because it only counts downloads from Apple’s Web site. The other ways in which QuickTime’s video player is distributed include digital cameras, of which there are more than 50 different models from companies like Canon and Olympus; nonlinear editing tools like Final Cut Pro; education and entertainment software titles; enhanced music CDs that offer video in addition to audio; and iTunes. “One of the biggest computer manufacturers in China packages it, as well as AOL,” says Casanova. “Distribution isn’t a problem for us.” In fact, Casanova roughly estimates that the total number of players in the market easily exceeds a billion.

While QuickTime’s architecture formed the basis of MPEG-4’s development, Apple as a company is fairly neutral as to which codec it wants to see win out. “Apple is a hardware company,” explains Casanova. “First and foremost, we’re interested in selling content creation platforms; it doesn’t matter what format the content ends up in.” That said, a recent Frost & Sullivan report indicated that QuickTime is creeping up on market leader Microsoft in the battle for streaming video dominance, commanding 36.8% of the market.

Real Video

That same report claimed that Real video had lost ground and was firmly entrenched in third, but yet again the veracity of statistics-based metrics have to be called into question as a representative of Real firmly stated that Frost & Sullivan didn’t contact Real when compiling their report. “People purposefully confuse the definition [of penetration stats],” says Kevin Foreman, GM Helix for RealNetworks. He went on to claim more than 400 million unique email addresses of users who have downloaded the RealPlayer. In terms of actual number of downloads, “we are well into the billions,” says Foreman. “But to a broadcaster, that number doesn’t make sense,” especially considering the fact that there are only an estimated 580 million people currently online.

That number will be increasing exponentially in the near future, though, as more and more cell phones are manufactured with video capabilities. Real’s poised to take advantage of this market by being included as the default media player on many of the major cell OSes. But potentially more significant to the increase in user base is Real’s movement into the European market.

Real recently announced that their open-source Helix player will ship with Linux-based OSes in Europe. The Helix player only allows for the playback of Ogg Vorbis and Theora-encoded video (two open-source video codecs), but users will be prompted with the opportunity for a free upgrade to RealPlayer 10 when they first use the Helix player. “There’s no QuickTime or Windows Media player for Linux,” says Foreman. “If you’re a Linux or a Solaris customer, your only real choice is Real.” While the Linux marketplace still accounts for only 2.7% of the total desktop pie, “a lot of analysts forecast that there will be more Linux desktops than Mac this year,” says Foreman. Plus, Linux-based OSes have gained a lot of momentum in cost-conscious European markets.

Windows Media Video

Speaking of media players in Europe, Microsoft’s monopolistic ways caught up with them earlier this year as the European Commission won an antitrust case against them. As a result of this litigation, Microsoft was ordered to stop packaging its Windows Media Player (WMP) with the Windows XP OS and pay a record $604 million fine. In light of Real’s attempt to increase its presence in the European market, “a lot of analysts would say that it is a big win for us,” says Real’s Foreman. “But our strategy is to not count on a verdict either way.” Microsoft has avoided having to succumb to this decision for the near future, as the Commission granted a stay on the penalties as Microsoft appeals the decision. A ruling on that appeal should come before the end of the year.

In the meantime, WMP’s current integration with Windows OSes guarantees its presence on the vast majority of PCs. A Mac version of the WMP 9 is available, but the future of WMP on the Mac is somewhat up in the air. With the beta release of WMP 10 , Microsoft has made clear that it wants to establish itself as a major player in the future distribution of digital audio and video content. Through their concept of a “digital media mall,” Microsoft has positioned WMP 11 to become the glue that will facilitate the transfer of digital content from sale to delivery to consumption. What makes this significant to the future of WMP on Macs is that most of the major online digital multimedia content purveyors only work with Windows-based systems. Whether or not Microsoft will deem creating a Mac version of WMP 10 worthwhile has yet to be seen; their primary focus is on increasing the number of CE devices that use WMP as their default media player (especially Microsoft’s own MediaCenters).

Flash and DivX

Though purists will point out that Macromedia’s Flash Player isn’t really a player—technically, it’s a plug-in—its near-ubiquity can’t be ignored. “93.5% of desktops with an Internet connection have Flash Player 6, the first version that serves video,” says Chris Hock, director of product marketing at Macromedia. This percentage refers to all OSes, but “the specific number for Flash Player 6 is a U.S. figure,” says Hock, based on a representative sample. “It’s a pretty similar number for Canada, Europe, and Asia.” For all versions of the Flash Video Player, the penetration rate increases to 98%. Besides being a plug-in rather than a player, the Flash Player differs from the others in this article in that it is completely customizable. This mutability is a plus for customers who really want to control the look and feel of their video, but it’s a negative for others, as creating a custom player does require someone with Flash expertise. Flash MX 2004 solves the problem of player development for non-technical types by including a set of prebuilt player templates.

Then there’s DivXNetworks, which has pursued the consumer electronics market as vigorously as it has the desktop base by licensing its player to set-top DVD player manufacturers like KiSS, Philips, and JVC, as well as to software and hardware manufacturers like Roxio, Plextor, and ArcSoft. Such a diverse approach to the market, and one that goes far beyond streaming, makes it hard to get a handle on the DivX player’s penetration, but DivX chief marketing officer and managing director Kevin Hell says there have been 120 million downloads of the player from the company’s Web site alone. Additionally, DivX recently announced its partnership with Italian telecommunications company Wind to deliver on-demand DivX content to more than 200,000 broadband subscribers in Europe, Hell says.

The Chinese Video Connection

The area of the world with the most potential for growth can be found in its most populous country. “China is a really hot marketplace,” says Real’s Foreman, “because most of the users aren’t just upgrading, they’re new player downloads.” Combine China’s burgeoning middle class and their desire to get onto the Internet with a government that can move unilaterally to adopt and encourage the adoption of whatever OS it chooses, and you can see how China represents the most significant market left for media players to penetrate.

In the end, does it really matter when or if any specific media player (or codec) will become the dominant standard? For those wanting to deliver video and audio content, it doesn’t seem so, especially since the big three (Microsoft, Apple, and Real) have made efforts to incorporate more and more codecs for video playback. For consumers, as long as they can enjoy the content they want, at a high enough quality, when and where they want it, they won’t care. This is the ultimate goal, regardless of what codec you use to deliver your content.

Flash vs. Windows Media

December 15th, 2006

Crucial to this discussion is that the format makes no difference if you don’t know who your audience is, what they want to see, how they want to see it, and how your business model works for delivering those things to viewers. Knowing your customer is the most important aspect of any business, especially when you are delivering content via streaming or downloading. If you don’t know your audience, you have bigger problems to worry about than which format(s) to choose.

With that in mind, let’s look at some differences between Flash and Windows Media and the strengths and weaknesses of each format. For starters, it’s impossible to compare one format to another unless you are comparing them in specific verticals. Adoption rates and usage vary greatly among the enterprise, media/entertainment, broadcast, education, and government markets, as well as among geographic regions.

Yes, there is no question Flash has been one of the hottest topics in the industry the past 12 months and each day we continue to see more and more content on the web in the Flash format, for specific content markets. But most of that adoption for Flash has been in the media and entertainment vertical as well as the video advertising market. No one would argue that in the video adverting market, Flash has Windows Media beat hands-down. But in the enterprise market, which I classify as Fortune 1000 as well as internal streaming communications users, Windows Media still reigns supreme. Flash is typically used for short-form content (under 30 minutes in length) whereas Windows Media is still generally used for any long-form content. Different industry verticals have different adoption rates.

Look on the web; how many live events do you see in the Flash format? Live streaming (webcasting) is primarily done in the Windows Media format, not Flash. Microsoft has a free Windows Media encoder tool for this purpose. Adobe does not yet have its own live Flash encoder and requires you to build your own or use one from a third party.

As of today, Flash has no digital rights management component and does not give users the ability to download videos to their desktops. Windows Media has digital rights management and is widely used for content models that let users download video or audio content while limiting their ability to copy it.

When it comes to audio-only streaming or downloading, Windows Media is still the dominant format. Typically, the Flash format is not used without some sort of video component involved. So for content such as music, or porting content to portable devices and mobile hardware, Windows Media is still the winner. Adobe has done some deals in the handset and carrier markets porting the Flash platform over to wireless devices, but its primary use is for Flash-based design and content services like games, not video. So far, Windows Media still has Flash beat in terms of carrier and handset adoption for actual video.

Windows Media also supports multi-bit-rate encoding and the ability to scale the video playback window without problems. Flash does not support any multiple bit rate encoding at this time, and scaling the Flash video window greatly reduces the quality of the video. [Editor’s note–The originally posted version of this story included the word “variable” instead of “multiple” in the previous sentence. We regret any confusion this may have caused.] As for the cost to stream content via a content delivery network (CDN), Windows Media is cheaper than Flash, as CDNs have to charge a platform license fee imposed by Adobe to use a Flash Media Server. This fee is small, but it can add up quickly for anyone delivering large amounts of streaming videos, and these days, delivering videos is a volume business.

At this point you might be saying, “Hmm. Sounds like Windows Media wins.” Maybe it does for your particular business or content need, but there are some strengths of Flash you should know about as well.

When it comes right down to it, most people I speak to who use Flash say they do so because the browser plug-in has a higher penetration rate than the Windows Media Player. Does it? No one really knows. Adobe has third-party metrics that say 97.7% of web users have the Flash Player installed, but these numbers vary based on region and player version. Also, just because someone has the player installed doesn’t mean that they use it. For you, the most reliable data on player install numbers is what you see from your customers. That’s all that matters.

The biggest advantage the Flash format has over Windows Media is the end-user experience. When it comes to Flash Video, users don’t think about whether they have a player installed, what version it is, what codecs are installed, or any of the technical details. You go to a website and the video just works. It’s seamless, it’s part of the content experience, and it takes the technical questions out of the picture. That’s what consumers like: ease of use. Many content creators want to make it as simple as possible for viewers to consume as much content as possible.

When people describe Flash Video, the terms they often use are immersive and interactive, like the ability to roll your cursor over a Flash Video and interact with that content. When it comes to customizing the video player, adding additional video data, and designing a website around that video, Flash beats Windows Media. The huge benefit for Adobe is that web developers already develop in the Flash format. Flash is considered the standard for web developers in terms of adding interactivity to websites, so it’s natural for them to develop websites with added video components in the Flash development environment.

That being said, Flash loses to Windows Media when it comes to tools that allow you to edit video that has already been encoded, as Adobe does not make any tools that allow you to edit an FLV file. Windows Media toolkits are far more robust than Flash, and Microsoft provides a player, something Adobe lacks, forcing you to have to build your own or get one from a third party.

Embedding video into a web page is easier in the Flash format and does not require a stand-alone player like some sites do for Windows Media-based content. Websites that include Flash Video make the video seem like part of the overall experience of the site, as opposed to treating it like a separate component from the site, the way many sites do with Windows Media Video. Flash also tends to work better across multiple browsers than does Windows Media, not to mention across PC platforms. Yes, Windows Media video does work on Macs, but it is not a seamless experience. The Mac player does not support digital rights management functionality, some of the newest audio and video codecs are not supported with the Mac player, and the new Intel-based Macs require a plug-in called Flip4Mac (www.Flip4Mac.com) in order to play Windows Media videos at all.

For some content creators, the extra cost involved in delivering Flash is worth it if they can provide a better end-user experience, while for others, Windows Media suits their goals just fine. The whole point is that this is not about one platform being better than another. It’s about using the best platform or combination of platforms based on your type of content, the device(s) you are delivering it to, and the end users you want to reach. Only you can decide which platform(s) to use based on the answers to those questions, and many times, content creators use multiple platforms to reach the widest numbers of users.

As the debate over the Flash and Windows Media formats continues to rage on in the industry, so does the battle between Adobe and Microsoft over which platform will reign supreme. Adobe is hard at work on Flash 9 (it shipped the player in late June) while Microsoft, not to be outdone, has announced it is working on a competing product, now called Microsoft Expression Interactive Designer, the release of which would coincide with that of their next-generation Windows operating system, Windows Vista. Although the target audiences of Expression Interactive Designer and Flash overlap somewhat, Microsoft is targeting its product towards creating user interfaces for Windows Presentation Foundation programs, while Flash focuses on user interfaces that run on many platforms, primarily over the web. And you know Microsoft—when they want to win something, you can never count them out.

It’s been a long time since the early days (circa 1999) when we saw the last good format battle in the industry. Some may disagree, but Adobe and Microsoft aggressively competing with one another is great for everyone. As we have seen in the past, competition between the platforms helps drive new and improved video quality, scalability, and functionality to the market a lot sooner. Good technology is not the savior of any industry–adoption is the key—but any platform that is going to make video consumption over any device smoother and easier will be adopted over time.

Come Q4 of this year and the beginning of next, we’ll see both companies really stepping up to the plate with new announcements and product offerings. And with Microsoft and Adobe both possessing plenty of resources for both product development and marketing, it’s going to shape up to be a real platform battle. Round two is just getting underway.

Written by Dan Rayburn for Streamingmedia.com