Video and MP3 player

[jim....@i-t-l.com]

Brad,

I have spent all weekend and more on this, icredibly frustrating.

I have found a possible solution and will mount a quick demo shortly. Its
a configurable player that is free for non commercial use but would cost us
£80 to licence and use on as many web sites as we wish. The key si that it
comes with all source code and can be tweaked to send the events (cue times
etc as we wish).

I have also found a streaming site that looks intersting

www.influxis.com

20 simultaneos connections at the bandwidth we need .. £20 per month not
ready to do this just yet but intersting to tuck away. Using their
bandwidth calculator, our type of work comes out at needing 200kbs
connection .. video at about 180, sound at about 20.

Jim

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com - Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider -
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange

[tav]

Hey all,

> I have found a possible solution and will mount a quick demo shortly.  Its
> a configurable player that is free for non commercial use but would cost us
> £80 to licence and use on as many web sites as we wish.  The key si that it
> comes with all source code and can be tweaked to send the events (cue times
> etc as we wish).

Can I suggest just using YouTube? They are committed to providing a
decent platform for videos and are free...

Their recent API improvements also make it extremely configurable. If
you are technically minded, take a look at:

* http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/js_api_reference.html

It allows for synching, cue times, &c.

A simple demo is available at:

* http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/js_example_1.html

The only reason not to use YouTube is for the quality of their videos.
Until they start supporting "HD quality" later this year, there are
other options -- Viddyou, Dailymotion, Vimeo, &c.

But, given that none of their APIs are even comparable to YouTube's,
I'd strongly recommend just throwing the videos onto YouTube and
waiting for the HD support later this year.

--
love, tav

plex:espians/tav | t...@espians.com

[tav]

Oh, there is also:

* http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/chromeless_example_1.html

Which shows dynamically loading of different videos, the chromeless
player and further options on YouTube.

A few years ago I implemented something very similar for green.tv:

* See http://www.green.tv/?debug_mode=1

It did all that YouTube does and more, including supporting all the
major formats -- H.264 (Quicktime, iPod), On2 VP6 (Flash), Sorenson
(Flash), WMV (Windows Media Player). But the downside was that you had
to encode all the formats. So we wrote an automatic-encoding
framework, but the downside to that is cost. Encoding movies is pretty
cpu-intensive. And it's hard to provide encoding services for free...

And thus my support of YouTube =)

With their recent API updates, they're starting to inch closer to the
functionality I had and needed. And, although they don't have a
business model, Google is willing to subsidise all those encoding
+bandwidth costs. So, until I (or someone else) comes up with a nice
decentralised solution which takes advantage of the spare cpu
+bandwidth we all have, YouTube is a very viable solution.

On Mar 25, 12:35 pm, tav <ask...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> > I have found a possible solution and will mount a quick demo shortly.  Its
> > a configurable player that is free for non commercial use but would cost us
> > £80 to licence and use on as many web sites as we wish.  The key si that it
> > comes with all source code and can be tweaked to send the events (cue times
> > etc as we wish).
>
> Can I suggest just using YouTube? They are committed to providing a
> decent platform for videos and are free...
>
> Their recent API improvements also make it extremely configurable. If
> you are technically minded, take a look at:
>

> *http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/js_api_reference.html

>
> It allows for synching, cue times, &c.
>
> A simple demo is available at:
>

> *http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/js_example_1.html

[Milan Andric]

On Mar 25, 8:02 am, tav <ask...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, there is also:
>
> *http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/chromeless_example_1.html

>
> Which shows dynamically loading of different videos, thechromeless
> player and further options onYouTube.
>
> A few years ago I implemented something very similar for green.tv:
>
> * Seehttp://www.green.tv/?debug_mode=1
>

This is very cool! I'm planning on writing a similar wheel using the
clapton CMS. Just started on it and I was running into roadblocks
about video players.

I think the current ideal solution for me would be to have someone
upload an h.264 video into the cms and then upload it to youtube via
some API/do the encoding etc.. then reference the appropriate video,
either youtube or h.264 if they want the podcast/vidcast. In this
scenario, we benefit because

1) we get the encoding features but still hang on to the h.264 which
is closer to the source and possibly higher res
2) we don't require the user to upload to another system (youtube acct
etc)
3) all the videos are in one place in youtube (our channel) since
users don't worry about youtube accounts and what to do next, just
upload h.264 to the cms.
4) support podcasts and other devices with the orig h.264 so we can
off the better experience for h.264 devices.
5) in the future you can change providers without changing any
workflow for the end user/producer

Does this sound like an interesting wheel to build? I'm not sure if
it's possible to upload to youtube via an API, I imagine it is.
I'll be working on this type of video app for a news organization ...
with clapton/django ... join in if you have the same itch.

http://code.google.com/p/clapton/issues/detail?id=14

> It did all thatYouTubedoes and more, including supporting all the
> major formats --H.264(Quicktime, iPod), On2 VP6 (Flash), Sorenson

> (Flash), WMV (Windows Media Player). But the downside was that you had
> to encode all the formats. So we wrote an automatic-encoding
> framework, but the downside to that is cost. Encoding movies is pretty
> cpu-intensive. And it's hard to provide encoding services for free...
>
> And thus my support ofYouTube=)

Quite amazing!

>
> With their recent API updates, they're starting to inch closer to the
> functionality I had and needed. And, although they don't have a
> business model, Google is willing to subsidise all those encoding
> +bandwidth costs. So, until I (or someone else) comes up with a nice
> decentralised solution which takes advantage of the spare cpu
> +bandwidth we all have,YouTubeis a very viable solution.
>

I'm all about using youtube, but I want to hang on to my orig h.264
and make that the one format to encode to for my video producers,
and automate the processing/workflow with youtube.

Thoughts/Ideas/Collaborate?

--
Milan
http://m.andric.us/

> On Mar 25, 12:35 pm, tav <ask...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
>
> > > I have found a possible solution and will mount a quick demo shortly.  Its
> > > a configurable player that is free for non commercial use but would cost us
> > > £80 to licence and use on as many web sites as we wish.  The key si that it
> > > comes with all source code and can be tweaked to send the events (cue times
> > > etc as we wish).
>

> > Can I suggest just usingYouTube? They are committed to providing a

> > decent platform for videos and are free...
>
> > Their recent API improvements also make it extremely configurable. If
> > you are technically minded, take a look at:
>
> > *http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/js_api_reference.html
>
> > It allows for synching, cue times, &c.
>
> > A simple demo is available at:
>
> > *http://code.google.com/apis/youtube/js_example_1.html
>

> > The only reason not to useYouTubeis for the quality of their videos.

> > Until they start supporting "HD quality" later this year, there are
> > other options -- Viddyou, Dailymotion, Vimeo, &c.
>

> > But, given that none of their APIs are even comparable toYouTube's,