Blog

Flash - Today's 8-Track Tape Player

Dave McIlroy — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 20:05:00 +0000

For some of those reading this the reference to 8-track tape will not even resonate. 8-track was a technology that came and went because it was only a temporary solution and never really that good. There was no point in fighting it, if you invested heavily in 8-track tape media (as some have invested today in Flash media) you were going to be left with the hefty cost of replacing your media and hardware (in today's case streaming infrastructure).

Flash advocates and those heavily invested in the plug-in are dragging their heals and fighting a similar yet inevitable battle as the 8-track generation. Flash was a temporary solution to what is now a 10 year old problem. Flash was okay, looked cool and solved some challenges but it has never been that good. And now with the proliferation of mobile computing on handheld devices Flash has met the end of it's useful life cycle.

Why is Flash today's 8-track? Because as it was with the 8-track, the delivery systems and technology has advanced to a point where Flash is too bulky. Mobile devices need to run light so as not to consume battery life too quickly. Flash as a plug-in takes a lot of computing resources, thus consumes energy rapidly. Apple's statement to never support Flash on iPhone or iPad was not only prolific but technically correct and the industry has logically followed. Not because Steve Jobs decreed it but because it is the logical evolution of media to smart devices.

It can be confusing for someone who keeps an eye on the latest gadgets (phones, tablets,. etc.). At a glance it would seem that Blackberry and Android based devices have adopted Flash, thereby keeping the plug-in relevant. In actuality this is no different that the cross over stereo of the day which had both a cassette and 8-track player.

In the 10's decade online media appears to be the domain of Apple and Google. Although Microsoft today has had the unenviable persona as an un-hip and uber behind the times sloth, they still have an install base that cannot be denied or ignored. So when Redmond announces Windows 8 and IE 10 and makes it abundantly clear that the new age is HTML-5 (plug-in free browsing), one still must take note.

Apple - No Flash
Microsoft - HTML-5
Google - WebM

Like the deprecation of the 8-track, when all the major labels stopped producing titles in the format, it was over. The web's "major labels" above, have made it very clear what the future of mobile browsing will be and that is a plug-in free software environment. The desktops, set top boxes and gaming consoles will all follow.

Unfortunately no one is likely going to buy your Flash based streaming media site at a flee market or garage sale even if they are nostalgic for that old format. Best bet is to cut your losses and look ahead but do be careful. As I write this today, HTML-5 is still bleeding edge. Few companies have had the required experience with it nor do they have the knowledge and background on the evolution to make it work correctly. So when you approach providers to assist you, ensure that you are dealing with a company that has the skill set and can accurately explain the migration to HTML-5. After all, you wouldn't want to spend a kings ransom only to find out that you had inadvertently banked on the equivalent of HD-DVD

Going, going... Silverlight

Dave McIlroy — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 06:40:00 +0000

The writing has been on the wall for some time. Microsoft Silverlight was nothing more than a reactive response to Adobe's Flash. As Flash will ultimately go, Silverlight already has. Get over it! We no longer use Morse code either.

Microsoft, in order to have any place in the evolving "cloud based" Internet, have more or less left Silverlight for dead as their latest OS Microsoft 8 is presented to developers.

The frustrated pro Silverlight Developers, flooded and flamed MSFT Silverlight forums.

I can appreciate the frustration that these developers are experiencing but it's over boys and girls. Time to move on and realize that the future is HTML5.

This also means Flash is history. Although Adobe is putting up a good fight, they cannot stave off the inevitable memetic transformation that is video without plugins.

Heeeeeeere's WebM!

Dave McIlroy — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:52:00 +0000

With Larry Page (co-founder, Google) replacing Eric Schmidt, all eyes are on the company to see what new culture Page may bring. Perhaps the most recent push of WebM is an indication.

Google Chrome browser dropped support for H.264 in January 2011, around the same time Page took the helm. There is a distinct commitment to promote the HTML5 platform and this has been made even more apparent with YouTube announcing that it is WebM transcoding all of the new videos uploaded and at the same time "reformatting" the existing library.

According to the YouTube Blog, the H.264 video codec will still be accepted as an uploaded format but WebM is the playback.

Opera, and Mozilla are fully behind this move and the recently released IE9 is HTML5 ready. So we will be seeing more an more video content streaming to HTML5 based players embedded in web pages, blogs etc.

This translates big-time for the smartphone market. HTML5 can run on a smartphone with far less overhead than Flash. As Android OS based phones continue to expand into the marketplace, content providers will be scrambling to transcode their titles and streaming video platforms will need to bite the bullet and swap out the Flash based front and back end systems.

Below is a sample of HTML5 based video. Note you will need an HTML5 compatible browser to view WebM and you will need to Join the HTML5 trial

Internet Broadcasting: A Look Forward into 2011 and Beyond

Dave McIlroy — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 03:02:00 +0000

In an interview with Streaming Media magazine, I was asked for my observations, trends and predictions based on the current state and future status of the Streaming media industry. In this article, among other issues, we discussed how models shift from free (ad supported) to pay based content. By conditioning an online audience that highly specific content is a good value proposition, thus smaller content producers have aided the larger aggregators like Hulu and Netflix in gaining market share. The article supports some fascinating findings from comScore for example, "Twenty-nine percent of those surveyed like the fact that it is easy to discover new shows by finding them online; 13% just plain prefer the online viewing experience, and 9% either don’t have a TV or, if they do, don’t subscribe to cable or satellite".

The conversation always wants to shift to "traditional TV Vs online broadcasts", this is not germane to the discussion. The big networks (CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox) will most certainly be around and will continue to produce content for traditional TV. What we have seen is content moving online as well as airing as a TV broadcast. Maybe it is segmented into clips or in other cases it is full episodes but very often it finds its way to a web portal / content site. Where the conversation needs to focus is what we know as Cable TV and delivery. As more and more users find it convenient to download or stream programs to computers, STBs and related mobile devices, Cable becomes redundant as a linear broadcast stream. Just look at the amount of infomercial content that has begun to air closer to prime time. You never saw that ten years ago.

Also of interest in the article is a look at the explosion of STBs (set top boxes) that make it simple to connect an Internet Broadcast stream to a TV, standard or HD sets. At PlayFullScreen we have leveraged this to enhance the viewer experience for the content that many of our clients produce.

Looking forward to the next 3 - 5 years, more advertising dollars are going to find their way into and around streaming video content. 2011 looks to be the breakout year for Internet Broadcasting. If you have content like, sports, entertainment, lectures and how to demonstartions, become your own broadcast media company, the timing has never been better.

You can find the entire article at StreamingMedia.com

As forecast - Big Media Comes Looking for Little Media Content

Dave McIlroy — Wed, 09 Feb 2011 04:58:00 +0000

Not to sound smug... no I take that back. I am a bit smug on this one.
Your content matters and you should become your own broadcast media company.
I have been advocating this for some time now, advising my clients that the time to begin broadcasting online is now! Get a jump on the learning curve. Perfect your production techniques, work on better lighting and audio. Try different camera angles, etc. As you do this, you will be considerably ahead of others who are surely to follow. The logic I have used and claimed was based on the trends that were and still are clearly evident. Internet and Television are melding. Digital channels and 24 hour specialty networks need original content. This has now escalated to the giants of TV, The Networks.

NBC's Owned and Operated Stations are looking to partner with nonprofit news organizations

Under the terms of the FCC order approving Comcast’s takeover of NBCU, at least half of NBC’s 10 O&Os have to find a nonprofit news center with which to work within the next year. Will other networks follow?

While the FCC has focused on news reporting, this may be the tipping point for other content like sports, arts and entertainment and lecture series.

In Canada, the CRTC has a major issue on their hands. As the big Cable and Telephone companies continue to buy up television networks, radio and specialty channels, the balance of power is amalgamating in the hands of a few. Independence in news and other community interests is being lost to corporate cost cutting and down sizing. Will the CRTC step in and demand that Rogers, Shaw, and Bell look to independent non-profits for news? If so, this would quickly lead to other content partnerships.

While the major networks in Canada are slow to learn, once they have a model, it becomes a game of follow the leader. As these media giants continue to lose cord cutting customers to Internet only accounts, it will become a race for original online content even in "micro-niche" segments. After all, eyeballs are eyeballs and if the new paradigm is to reach them any way you can, then acquiring access to the viewers of this narrow cast content will be on the agenda.

The opportunity for independent content publishers to work with networks will happen sooner than later in Canada. The last attempt by the big three (Rogers, Bell & Shaw) to lobby the CRTC and force "usage based billing (UBB)" on Internet subscribers has blown up the CRTC's face. As the backlash mounted the CRTC had no choice but to bow to the pressure and review the ruling before it was ordered to do so by the government. With this issue potentially skirted, there is nothing to get in the way of the natural progression of online content becoming common place in Canadian's homes.

Online Viewers - Conditioned To Expect HD Streams

Dave McIlroy — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 18:39:00 +0000

Isn't HDTV great? All one needs to do is watch your favorite HD program in Standard definition and it becomes obvious. We are spoiled now. No matter whether it is sports, reality TV, drama or news, we have really gotten use to the resolution 1080p.

As hard is it is to go backward from your favorite HD program to SD, so too is viewing webcasts (online streaming or Internet broadcast) in the compressed video format once we have become accustomed to high resolution video and in particular HD.

The challenge facing the industry at the moment is an appetite for HD resolution which is ahead of the curve. That curve being the last mile delivery speed, the home network (modem, router, NIC) and the video processing capability of the computer or device being used for playback. The online viewer is generally non technical and doesn't relate to the complex series of integrated elements that need to get along in order to stream an HD video over the public Internet backbone. Because the DVD player works well, so too should the streaming video on their brand new computer. At least that is their perception.

Let's assume that the ISP has the broadband capacity all the way through their network to the home and sustaining a 2Mbps (2000kbps) live stream is possible. The signal enters the home across a modem which has 100/1000Mbps network capability. That modem is either a WiFi (802.11) enabled device or the modem connects to a WiFi router which then in turn connects to the wireless laptop, desktop or other device in the home. In many homes there are multiple devices all accessing the router / modem. It is at this point that the live HD stream would typically fail, buffer, etc. To the end user anticipating the HD viewing experience on their brand new computer connected to their rocket fast Internet connection, it would seem that everything is in place. It is unfortunately not that simple if the home environment is WiFi.

WiFi is susceptible to environmental issues (metal, other frequencies, the neighbors WiFi) and while the user has no issue with websites, email and even the odd YouTube video, streaming a live HD video requires optimal conditions.

The other issue with home networks that can be confusing to the average user is local network traffic. Today it is common to have three or more computers connected and accessing the Internet simultaneously. This should not be a problem and usually is not when email, Facebook and web surfing is the predominant activity. However younger users tend to be more active with downloading torrents (movies, music), streaming Hulu, Netflix or similar while Mom and Dad logon to the HD stream and become frustrated that it is not playing correctly. The technical reason is data collisions or chocking within the home network. One cannot see this and so it is often diagnosed by a non technical person as an issue with the content provider.

So we have a real conundrum on our hands. The marketplace wants HD streaming, the technology appears to be in place to allow for it, yet the failure rate it still very high.

As the HD content service provider, it is challenging position to be in. The model is clearly heading in the direction of live HD streaming. Manufacturers are building devices capable of playing 1080p live streams. ISPs are upgrading their networks from the core to the pillow. So as the content provider what can one do?

The only solution appears to be; move ahead and face the backlash from the consumer. It comes with the territory. If the content provider does not build now for the HD market, they will be too far behind to catch up when the elements synergistic-ally meld to allow for uninterrupted deliver of HD video. One must do their best to educate the consumer and manage their expectations. Over time, the marketplace will smooth over and the issues which now appear to be major ones, will be minor. Then we can all start over and retrain our attention on those same expectations from the mobile smartphone phone and tablet users, which are sure to follow on the heels of the current challenges.

Note: The writer Dave McIlroy has been an innovator in streaming media since the earliest days of webcast (1995).

Google drops H.264 from Chrome - knee jerk or brilliance?

Dave McIlroy — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:25:00 +0000

For the average consumer this recent move by Google won't mean much. Early adoption of web enabled devices for "TVeverywhere" is still limited to a fraction of the market. It will impact all those otherwise oblivious users of devices like the PS3 and Xbox, the iPhone and iPad, the Blackberry and new Playbook as well as anyone using Mac OS and Safari. When put into this perspective it should earth shattering news. So far only the developers and service providers wrestling with standards have taken notice but here is why you will want to pay attention.

Google owns their own media codec like H.264, it is now called WebM (formerly VP8). Google initially stirred the pot when they announced WebM would be open and free to use (royalty free) unlike H.264 which is owned by Mpeg-LA The move from Google caused Mpeg-LA to relax the licensing and royalty for the H.264 codec but many saw this as a bait and switch. Get users to adopt H.264 thus further proliferating the codec and then hit the market with the license fees. Nonetheless H.264 was already widely in use and with iPhones and iPads flying off the shelf, it is the codec wrapped in Mp4 that allows one to view videos on these mobile devices. NOTE: Apple made it abundantly clear; their devices would not run Flash, so files with the .flv extension will not play, whereas files with the extension .mp4 (H.264) will.

Browsers begin to adopt HTML5
With great promise for new development and standardization of the tag, HTML5 was announced as a new standard with the exception of the video tag. As a non-technical backgrounder, we use browsers everyday without giving any thought to how or why we are able to see images within our preferred browser. That is because the tag was adopted with standards such as .jpg, .gif .bmp etc. Prior to a standard the "old school" world wide web users had to run a picture viewer that could interpret the file type and render this into an image. Netscape Navigator 1.0 made it simple for a new user by doing this through the HTML tag which told the browser that "filename.jpg" was an image and it should be displayed in the assigned area.

The same could and should apply to video but there is so much more at stake today. Instead of making it a standard we instead have "plugins" to make our video play. Flash, Silverlight, Quicktime are the most popular and depending on your preferred browser these plugins either work well or create all kinds of issues. As a new update is released we are nagged to get the latest "fix". As browser versions change we are often plagued by broken links or failed video streams. This is all due to the multiple formats, plugins and coding requirements that a web site developer must consider each time they author a page.
A footnote: At the browser level the software has the ability to recognize the tag and play a format called Theora (ogv, ogg). This format is open source and free as it is unencumbered by patent licensing restrictions. Critically it currently falls below the performance standard of H.264

HTML5 would eliminate this. All browsers, regardless of MacOS, Windows, Linux etc. would play video without plugins or proprietary applications. This would undoubtedly fuel advancements and move the technology forward dramatically. However, by not adopting the video tag standard it left the Behemoths of the online world to battle it out.

Apple and Safari (Macbook, iPhone and iPad) have taken a hard stance adopting H.264. There are many economic reasons for this including a number of patents around the format.
Firefox and Opera support Theora and the open source ogv format
Microsoft IE9 has added support for H.264 and WebM
Google Chrome supports Theora, WebM and currently H.264*

* Google has announced in a blog post that they will be dropping H.264

Why the consumer should care:
Consumers will spend upwards of $600 for a mobile device (tablet, phone, e-reader etc.) There is no standard set for the video delivery to these devices. In order to keep current website and online media developers have used H.264 with a "fallback" to Flash to cover 99.9% of all scenarios. This makes the devices capable of viewing high quality streaming video in both live and archived formats.

Consumers are embracing online delivery of TV and Movies (Hulu, Netflix etc.) and the market has responded to this by introducing devices known as set top boxes (STB) which interface your TV with the Internet and allow the viewer to control the screen with a simple remote. Game consoles (Xbox, PS3, Wii) also have the ability to play online media in multiple formats including H.264

Could your device soon be obsolete? By removing H.264 from the Chrome browser (Google's web browser) this signals the ultimate battle line; Google Vs Apple. Google claims the move is about open development and innovation and by supporting WebM and Theora (both open and free) this will align Firefox, Opera and Chrome. This leaves Apple as the champion for H.264 / Mp4 (again Flash is not in the picture). Microsoft had interestingly become the diplomat. IE9 has added support for WebM and a Firefox plugin for H.264 as well as continuing to nurture the often overlooked Silverlight* media suite

* Silverlight supports digital rights management (DRM) and as a result becomes essential to studios and TV networks when online delivery of premium content is concerned.

Google's Android OS takes over smartphone OS. Android OS is gaining enormous adoption in the smartphone space and has recently rivaled iOS as the top OS in use. Apple still controls the majority of hardware but Android is the OS across more phones such as Samsung and HTC. Android is powerful yet light, making it ideal for other smart devices such as your TV, car, and home appliances. All these smart wired devices would of course incorporate video streaming as a feature. In order to operate within the limited power requirements video would need to be supported at the browser level, HTML5 and WebM being the logical architecture and delivery.

Conculsions:
Google may be provoking the patent lawsuit which would involve Mpeg-LA and Apple, whereby standardization would occur if Google was found to be clear of any patent infringements. Hardware device manufacturers would be clear to invest in the adoption of WebM and to a lesser degree Theora. Apple and Safari would then be more or less forced to comply or risk alienating themselves as "us against the world"
Google has a lawsuit with Oracle over their Andriod OS which uses Java. Android OS is an essential component to the proliferation of WebM. Google may be pushing all these to a head thereby clearing the path for the next generation of development.
Google's philosophy would appear to be the driver behind all these moves. If successful it would be true that the future development of video would open and this would drive advancement. It would also be true that Google would have significant control of almost every aspect of the online environment (search, mail, mobile, video), as a result Google would know our every online move and behavior.
Microsoft does not appear to be in any position to challenge the status quo. Windows 7 mobile has a mere 1% of the share and while Windows OS is still miles ahead of anyone else, PC sales growth is more than 7% below projections. The Microsoft Keynote at CES 2011 mainly addresses Win Mobile 7 and XBox - Kinect. Nothing about Windows 8 or Windows TV.

Summary: Hold off buying any gadget of significant price, that is unless you are okay with having a short life span with that device in order to stay with the curve. I am of the opinion that we will see 18 - 24 months of frustration at the developer level as it pertains to online accessibility to video and the coveted TVEverywhere ubiquity. That does not mean that one cannot accomplish the 3-screen objective for video viewing. For under $100 you can get a Roku device which will let you dabble in online media to TV. The iPhone, iPad and recent Android based smartphones will play Mp4 video and there are workarounds so that non Flash based content will stream live and on-demand. Of course the desktop is where it all started and if you are prepared to update, install and uninstall browsers for the next while you will get a sense of what is coming. Meanwhile, we the consumers will have to wait a while longer as business interests worth 100s of billions of dollars are fought out in the courts and in the boardrooms. CEO's egos are at stake after all and I would not want to bet against Steve Jobs. In any case it is going to be one hell of a fight and at some point we the consumer will be told what to do, what to buy and how to behave with our new toys.

YouTube's success is chocking itself - Spammers benefit

Dave McIlroy — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 22:11:00 +0000

The more successful your video becomes on YouTube the less likely you are to benefit. Spammers have learned to watch for high traffic clips and then hammer these with links and promotions spamming anyone wanting to view comments pertaining to the clip itself.

This defeats the social aspect of video viewing and should certainly be a concern should you wish to share the link with friends

Forwarding or posting a link to a popular video just increases the reach of the spammers. In otherwords it is self defeating

This will ultimately lead to reduced interest in the viral aspect of YouTube thus chocking on it's own success

The good news is that YouTube has trained the masses as to the effectiveness and interest in online video. Becoming your own Internet Broadcast media company is more beneficial than trying to gain attention via YouTube. Online producers of Internet Broadcasts can control their own views and traffic by embracing new technology that puts publishing and distribution into their hands. The tide is turning and it is very positive for all those looking to be the antithesis of YouTube, Myspace and other similar social video sites and apps.

Intel Chip "Insider" unlocks HD Movies for streaming

Dave McIlroy — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:27:00 +0000

One of the knocks against HTML5 video has been the lack of security or DRM. Intel may have resolved this at the chip level. A new chip feature called "Insider" will allow for a protection layer to unlock 1080p content from online streaming services. New graphic technology is also being included in the chip to speed up video. The Core chips are based on a new microarchitecture code-named Sandy Bridge. They will not currently support DirectX 11 at the this time.

Studios have been reluctant to release titles in HD due to piracy concerns. Apparently the technology acts as a security blanket for end to end delivery. One would need the new chip to view content which would be the Blu-ray equivalent of 1920 x 1080.

With H.264 video and HTML5 ready browsing a set top box such as Roku could now be the interface between your big screen TV and the Internet pipe feeding your home network.

This points to services such as Netflix and Amazon increasing competition with Itunes.

HTML5 is undoubtedly the way things will go for video it is the logical next step. Plugins and updates to software, browsers and operating systems will be a thing of the past. It will not matter what OS you run or what browser you use, everything will just work.

If Intel has their way, it won't matter if you are a Mac or PC user, either way the next block buster HD movie you stream will require you to have their Insider featured chip.

Canadians watch the most online video

Dave McIlroy — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 17:07:00 +0000

Broadband and mobile data proliferation in Canada point to a big year for Internet Broadcasting in 2011. More and more viewers are tune out of cable and seeking narrow cast content online. This current study shows trend.