|
...cont'd
from page 1
ANOTHER
PERSPECTIVE
In order to get another perspective, I consulted Mark Cuban, co-founder
and President of Broadcast.com which was recently acquired by Yahoo!
making Mr. Cuban the webcasting industry's first billionaire. Cuban
said that distributed server networks (like the one that Akamai
deploys) are "terrible for serving many simultaneous (live streaming)
events." He told me via e-mail, "We used to use distributed servers,
then we learned our lessons the hard way."
He went on to explain, "You have to have great, uninterruptable
connectivity to (all of) those servers, or all servers (that are)
downstream fail. . . . When it's the bottom of the 9th (in a live
baseball game), and the server on one of your ISP's network fails,
what are you going to do, page the ISP and ask them to fix it? It's
easy to route around when there is just one thing going on. But
when there are 30 or 40 or 1,000 (live) events like we have going
on, then one server failing impacts 10's or 100's of events." For
these reasons, Broadcast.com is building a multicast network which
uses distributed routers instead of servers. Cuban claims that they
already have 700,000 "multicast enabled dialup and broadband ports."
Cuban claims that his network "blows away distributed servers for
live (events) any day of the week."
For more information on Broadcast.com's multicast network, visit:
http://www.broadcast.com/about/multicast/
RealNetworks also has its own approach with its Real Broadcast Network
(RBN) which it calls the first "multi-tier distributed broadcast
architecture for the Internet." More information on their strategy
can be found at: http://www.real.com/solutions/rbn/index.html.
In any case, I think it's safe to say that "these guys" (as Jobs
called them) are doing more than just _thinking_ "about how to deal
with these quality issues." In fact, these two solutions (and, of
course, there are others) are already up and running. While I wish
it much success, the Apple/Akamai "broadcast network" is still unproven.
What ever happened to Apple's policy of "we don't announce before
we ship"?
THE PROMISE
Here's what I think that Jobs should have talked about, but did
not even mention. While I think that streaming QuickTime will get
better and better, it already has advantages that are not widely
recognized.
As most video professionals are already aware, the QuickTime architecture
is extremely robust. As a result, QuickTime can combine media for
online presentation in ways that none of its competitors can touch.
Especially significant on today's video Web is its ability to combine
Macromedia Flash vector animations in a single file with video.
RealNetworks supports Flash too, but in their system, the Flash
and video files have to be kept separate and must be laid out in
a grid using SMIL (Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language).
In QuickTime, Flash can be layered on top of video. The result is
that only QuickTime can create seemless, bandwidth-friendly files
with built-in interactivity. To my knowledge, this degree of multimedia
integration just isn't possible in any other format.
 In
the keynote, content from Disney (see image) was shown using Flash
to create a front-end interface that launched additional QuickTime
clips. As I mentioned in my July, Videograph, Video Web column,
"Macromedia Innovates Web Media,"
Flash can now be integrated with QuickTime video including transparency
as well as mouse roll-overs and other effects to create a new kind
of user experience. That's important because this is the kind of
innovative streaming media that is desperately needed on today's
video Web.
I also think that Jobs and Apple have rushed to emphasize streaming,
partly because they are such a late entry, but another advantage
of QuickTime is the high quality of files that can be offered for
downloading. Obviously, this was demonstrated quite successfully
with the Star Wars trailer. There is another segment of the video
market who are not streaming video on the Web because of the quality
compromises. I have to think that Lucas used QuickTime for this
reason. This is a QuickTime advantage that needs more emphasis,
especially when combined with the still existing "FastStart" feature.
Another advantage that QuickTime has over RealNetworks that Jobs
_did_ talk about was the "no server tax" strategy. Microsoft has
already taken this approach by giving away NetShow servers with
NT servers (see my October, 1998, Videography, Video Web column,
"Microsoft Flexing Its Familiar Muscle
on the Video Web"). On the other hand, Apple's open source approach
is already crossing platform boundaries. In addition to its own
version, according to Jobs, the Darwin, open source version of the
QuickTime streaming server has already been downloaded by 25,000
users and, among others, it is already up and running on the open
source Linux operating system, among others.
This approach will be particularly effective in what might be considered
the corporate, middle level of the streaming market. These are customers
that Apple's Bannerman said were thrilled with Apple's decision
to offer their streaming server without per stream license fees.
Bannerman specifically mentioned customers who have been licensing
100-300 stream servers from RealNetworks. I think that Apple has
a real shot at making a dent in their market. That kind of competition
is healthy and can only help the streaming market. I look forward
with interest to watching this market unfold.
THE ANSWER
So after all this, what is QTV? I think that the URL that Apple
is still using to place QTV on their web site, http://www.apple.com/quicktime/showcase/
describes it. Plain and simple, it's a showcase. And the Akamai
network is designed to enhance the experience of what we might call
these early QuickTime streaming "pilots." As Apple's Steve Bannerman
described it to me, QTV is designed to "compel downloads" of QuickTime
4 by offering "great stuff to watch" and, as a result of Akamai's
server network and its support, to ensure that users "have a great
experience."
I think that Broadcast.com's Mark Cuban best reflected streaming
QuickTime's market reality when he told me, "We are looking at QT
closely. I think its a little bit early to come to any conclusions,
but as with all technologies, we will support it for paying customers,
and support it well. As it starts to mature, I am sure we will see
some more demand for it."
Stay tuned.
Part
2 of 2
<<<Previous
Page
|
