Origin Perspectives


Current Postings:

Is Flash dead?

There has been a lot of commotion on the Internet since the announcement of the iPhone/iPad not supporting Flash. This has created a veritable panic on the Internet as most people see this as a sign that the popular multimedia format is on the decline.

But, with all things Apple, there is always an ulterior motive. Fancy animation effects aside, Flash is the dominant video delivery format on the Internet. Without the ubiquity and ease of installation of the plug-in to enable easy video playback in a brower, it is unlikely that Internet video stars like YouTube would have reached critical mass.

As an alternative, Apple has suggested HTML5, which is an open standard that includes a number of new APIs that allow you to interact with the browser in a more application-like way. One of these new APIs is a video element tag that can play a video in the browser with a single line of HTML code:

<video src="videoURL" />

Seems simple enough, and in the last few months many of our customers have approached us about creating a replacement Flash player for them using HTML5. However, with HTML5 you are plunged back into the browser wars of the 1990’s, where web developers had to test their websites in multiple browsers and versions (Internet Explorer, Netscape, Safari) in an effort to minimize the different behaviors for standard tags. This image sums it up really well, showing the fractured support for HTML5 features across all popular browsers, with the worst culprit being, as usual, Microsoft Internet Explorer. Even within the simple ‘video’ tag, there are differences. All will support the MPEG4 format, some will support the OGG video format, and probably only Chrome will support the recently donated VP8 codec.

One fact that is little discussed on the topic is that only Apple Safari will support live streaming using their open HLS standard which also works on iPhone/iPad. This is a major show stopper for any customer that provides a mixture of live and on demand content, and will require you to have a Flash or Silverlight player around for live event delivery. Adaptive bit rates? … only supported by Safari. The other major disadvantage is that players now days don’t just play video. They are full-fledged applications that authenticate users, secure content, navigate playlists, search and recommended content, display advertisements, and submit analytics data. To fully move to HTML5, each one of these major functions will need to be developed in AJAX/JavaScript. The downside with JavaScript is that the code is visible, meaning that calls to backend systems will be exposed, and implementing security, including DRM, will be harder.

In summary, Apple’s ban and HTML5 is not the silver bullet that will kill Flash. For the moment, it is actually making things harder for content owners to get their content out to all platforms using a single format, and if you want to stream live video to more than just Apple products, you will need to use Flash or Silverlight.



Author, Forest Johns, VP of Solution Engineering

Posted July 7th, 2010 - 0 comments

To App or not to App

As companies start to wade their way into the mobile landscape, the first thing that they normally request is if they should build an “app” to distribute their video content to smart phones. This is in part due to the endless Apple iPhone commercials that burn the phrase, “There’s an app for that”, into your minds. However, creating a specific application for a particular phone(s) may not always be the best solution. In addition to creating a branded application, there are two other options that may be better suited depending on the nature of the business problem that needs to be solved. The options are as follows:

Application
An application is a compiled piece of code that runs on a specific smart phone, or a family of handsets. Each phone grouping (iPhone, Android, Blackberry, Winmobile, Symbian) has its own OS, and a different way of creating, running, and distributing applications. For example, an iPhone application is written in Objective-C and is distributed via the App Store. An Android and Blackberry application is written in Java, and is distributed via their proprietary markets. Windows Mobile requires a C# application and has a similar marketplace. Although for some phones users can directly load applications, the stores/markets are really the only mainstream option and have the advantage of providing updates. Media such as images and videos can be embedded into the application directly into the application.

Pros: Branded user experience, can operate without network connection, fewer compatibility issues with different models within same OS family, more UI options, can provide video playback support
Cons: Users have to specifically search for and install application, unique application needs to be built for each phone OS with little overlap, updates require a new release, including video in the application increases size

Optimized Website/Portal
An optimized website displays itself within the native browser of the phone, just like any other website. Most smart phones now have very sophisticated browsers and can view most web sites if they stick to HTML, CSS and JavaScript (no Flash/Silverlight). Web site developers still have to take into consideration what type of phone is viewing the page, and will utilize handset detection to determine the appropriate sizing and video formats that will work for each of the models.

Pros: Instant updates, build once for all phone OS with small adjustment for different phones, no installation required
Cons: Requires a network connection, somewhat limited UI options, handset detection can be extremely difficult and time consuming to maintain, relies on native video player of phone OS

Hybrid
The hybrid method is a combination of the two previous methods and utilizes an installed application that pulls some or all of its content from the Internet. For example, Bank of America’s Android app is distributed and installed through the market, but when run, it simply pulls up an optimized web portal within the application. Another example of a hybrid is an application that pulls larger media files from the network, for example videos off a CDN, when the user requests them.

Pros: Only small amount of OS dependant development and fewer releases required, reduced application file sizes, can still brand the experience
Cons: Requires a network connection, some level of handset detection still required

Creating and maintaining applications for multiple phones types can be a real handful as you will seldom find a single resource aside from an agency that can create all variants. This is why in most cases, the hybrid or web site approach is the best fit for most business needs, particularly for situations where the content itself is pulled from an external source or needs to be updated frequently.


Author, Forest Johns,VP of Solution Engineering

Posted May 18th, 2010 - 2 comments

Happenings at Mobile World Congress 2010

Origin Digital recently had the opportunity to share its technology and solution sets with a broad assortment of international players in the mobile services market. As an exhibitor and workshop presenter within the Accenture Pavillion at the Mobile World Congress (MWC) in Barcelona, Origin shared not only its advanced IP broadcast management solutions and player frameworks, but also its broader strategy for accelerating the consumption of video on mobile devices - while protecting carrier networks from network burden due to backhaul, and performance issues related to congested Internet gateways.

With more and more mobile users accessing both live and on-demand video content on any number of rich content enabled devices – led mostly by Apple’s iPhone – carrier networks are getting bombarded with traffic that their data networks were really not designed to handle. To understand this, consider that an hour of typical web browsing on a mobile phone consumes about 40 megabytes of data, while an hour spent watching fuzzy YouTube videos will consume upwards of 180 megabytes, and a live event, like a match or concert, might consume up to 300 megabytes or more.

The cumulative effect of proliferating devices and growing video consumption habits among mobile users is a “cratering” of carrier networks – which impacts all data services for all users, and commonly contributes to what is still perceived as an inferior viewing experience. It doesn’t help matters that for the vast majority of content being consumed, the carriers have no revenue stake – and with the popularity of unlimited data plans, this just adds up mounting cost, as carriers are forced to contemplate massive network upgrades, just to be competitive. Most major networks are feeling this pain, and many of them are publicly crying “uncle”.

Origin Digital has partnered with the global leader in CDN services, Akamai Technologies, to create a unique offering which both reduces the burden on the carrier networks caused by consumption of popular content and also creates a mechanism for “plugging in” content partners to create high quality experiences which result in revenue. The solution combines what is called a Private Content Delivery Network (or PCDN) with Content Acceleration Services. It works like this:

Working with Accenture technical and business consulting teams, the carriers frame up their goals and projections around the use of video on their networks – now and going forward. Then, the Akamai technologists create a plan for embedding their global caching servers within the carrier networks – as dedicated nodes to handle the carrier traffic. Finally, Origin Digital acts as the “on-ramp” for partner content which is acquired, managed, encoded and delivered directly to the cache points within the carrier network. The combination of services can have dramatic results:

1. The carrier will instantly experience relief across its network and will lighten the reliance on Internet gateways, because popular content requests don’t have to travel repeatedly from the tower out to the source on the public Internet. After the initial retrieval, the content can be pulled from the cache which can be located proximally to the towers at the aggregation points.

2. The carriers can now begin to engage partners for subscription or possibly ad supported content onto their network, because Origin Digital can capture and process the content – and deliver directly onto the cache points.

3. Because both Origin Digital (on the processing end) and Akamai HD Network technology (on the delivery side) both support smooth streaming, delivery from the cache to the tower and out to the user is automatically optimized depending on the available bandwidth on the network and also the quality of the user’s connection. So, all users receive the best video stream their connectivity can afford them. This creates a big leap in the quality of the experience – which can’t be overestimated in an industry where subscriber churn profoundly affects the bottom line.

Not surprisingly, there was a high degree of interest in this among the mobile carriers which Origin Digital had the opportunity to speak with – and it looks like the coming weeks will be very active as these discussions progress.



Author - Curt Kendall, VP of Business Development

Posted March 12th, 2010 - 0 comments

The Coming of Age for Mobile Video

To be published in the SHOW DAILY publication


The continuing technology evolution continues to revolutionize the mobile phone industry with powerful processors, fast Internet, high resolution screens, and thousands of applications. Mobile devices, which traditionally have served a singular purpose, have evolved beyond “dial tone”. With the introduction of new “smart” devices such as the Apple iPhone®, Windows Mobile®, BlackBerry® and Google Android™, mobile devices have become multimedia platforms that now deliver “videotone.”

Cisco estimates that mobile data traffic will double every year through 2013, increasing 66 times between 2009 and 2013 and by 2013, 64 percent of the world’s mobile traffic will be from video (Source). Additionally, thanks to applications like YouTube®, iTunes® and the availability of 3G connectivity, high quality video on your handset is a reality.

This land of mobile promise is a long time promise but only a recent occurrence; smart phone capabilities have made dramatic strides in the last few years, most notably with the introduction of the iPhone. However, the dramatic rise of 3G-enabled phones and data-hungry users have caught wireless providers off guard, and it is negatively impacting not only the users’ experience, but also their perception of the overall service.

Few expected the massive increase in data usage; 3G networks were deployed with the idea that access over the Internet would be limited, compared to desktop and laptop computers. Pipes were relatively small and devices relatively simple. The original thinking was that phones would be used to access WAP-optimized web sites, corporate email, “walled content” gardens accessed through the provider’s own network, and standard sites viewed slowly due to cumbersome navigation. The new reality is that
mobile browsers have improved, while applications for live and on demand video playback capabilities have dramatically enhanced navigation and user experience.

Although video support is inherent on most smart phones, delivering content to the phones is not necessarily easy because video cannot always be viewed within the mobile browser. It is handled by a separate video player built into the phone’s operating system (OS), and transition between the browser and the application is not always smooth. Mobile device consumption of video is ready to take another dramatic step forward this year, however, with the introduction of Adobe Flash® v10.1 support for most smart phones. This will not only enable the hardware accelerated browsing of thousands of Flash® powered web sites that were previously inaccessible, but will also allow Flash® video to play within the phone’s browser without having to jump to another application. This capability will allow for ubiquitous access to live video content which is notorious for bringing networks to their knees. Consumers rejoice, but wireless providers are understandably concerned.

The nice thing about mobile handsets today is that they, for the most part, behave like regular computers. Devices access content over standard protocols just like PCs, using HTTP and real-time streaming protocols. Where they are dissimilar, however, is in how they access the Internet, with all requests travelling through the wireless provider’s private network to peering locations. This is less of an issue for wireless providers who are also ISP providers because they typically have expansive, well-connected networks, but the majority of content that people want to view is not within the provider’s network. To make matters worse, as more and more wireless providers offer unlimited data plans, usage and costs increase while revenue remains flat.

To increase performance, the choice is pretty stark; build more network capacity, bring the content closer to the user, or employ a combination of the two.

The first option is fairly simple. Increase infrastructure investment, adding more and bigger pipes, and establish better peering relationships with major ISPs which host the content on the Internet. This will improve overall throughput, but not efficiency. Popular content will continue to be requested from within the network and increasingly consume bandwidth inefficiently.

The second option is to utilize caching technology which will cause content that is popular to be stored closer to the end-user. This will result in fewer trips to the edge of the network because it will be served from within instead, reducing the need for more and bigger pipes.

The news isn’t all bad, though. As wireless data networks become more efficient and better performing, it creates a platform for revenue growth per user. Wireless providers who make the investment will have, not unlike cable providers, a highly connected, video enabled subscriber base. It is an attractive proposition for content owners who are looking to expand their own revenue models with premium content offerings. Exclusive content offerings could be used as an alternative to using the mobile phones themselves as a differentiator for consumers. Finally, consistent high performance and availability is also a highly desirable feature which can be used to attract and retain new users. Bad performance in one aspect of the service will cause a negative perception of the service as a whole.

Advanced handset performance, high speed Internet access, and in-browser Flash support is creating a perfect storm for live and on demand video on the mobile. Wireless providers that are positioned to offer the best access, and content owners that make their video available to wireless users will be on the forefront of a major consumption shift in the mobile industry.









Author - Darcy Lorincz, CEO

Author’s Notes:

Source: “Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update,” Retrieved January 29, 2009, from “Web”

Posted January 28th, 2010 - 0 comments

Smooth, and Dynamic, and Adaptive streaming, oh my!

You may or may not be familiar with a relatively new online video streaming technology that has been around for over a year, but has yet to be fully embraced by most content publishers online. This technology, however, can be hard to describe because it has many names, with each being called something different by the companies that have incorporated it into their player and streaming software.

• Microsoft’s Silverlight calls it Smooth Streaming
• Adobe’s Flash calls it Dynamic Streaming
• Apple’s iPhone/iTouch calls it Adaptive Streaming (or HTTP Streaming)

Although there are some pretty major technical differences in terms of how each of these technologies work, the end result as far as user viewing experience of video content is concerned, is more or less the same. If you have heard of these technologies, you might ask why should I care about smooth/dynamic/adaptive streaming? What is the point? How will it benefit my customers? The major accomplishment of the technology is that you don’t have to compromise the quality of your video online anymore (ok, you still have some limits).

When trying to push the limits of video quality for both live and on-demand, you always have to worry about alienating users with lower bandwidth (dial-up, DSL, 3G) and less powerful computers. As a result, you either have to cater to the lowest denominator, missing an opportunity to provide better quality to those who can see it, or provide a mechanism so that users can switch to a higher quality feed. A high/medium/low toggle helps alleviate some of the issues, but some people may not know they can switch, or may think they should be able to see the high quality feed and end up being frustrated because the video is choppy or won’t play at all. Settings (user preference, session, cookie, etc.) can alleviate constantly having to select “high” quality, but if you travel with your computer the speed of your network can change, for example notoriously horrible hotel connections. Recognizing this problem, an earlier solution was to add player code to automatically select the appropriate bit rate based on bandwidth detection done by timing the download of a test file. This solution did work but it typically only tested at the beginning of the streaming session and wouldn’t react to changes in performance which occur during viewing. This bandwidth only model also provided limited visibility into the performance of the actual computer itself.

Although these issues seem minor, they can be a road block between the user and your content. The situation will also become increasingly exasperated as mobile phones become more like PCs and users transition between 2/3/4G and Wi-Fi networks. The increase in HD content on the web also drives the need for higher bit rates to provide quality viewing experiences for the larger video size.

Then along came smooth/dynamic/adaptive streaming.

With these new adaptive technologies, the user no longer needs to know, choose or even understand. Their computer, player, and, in some cases, the network server they are receiving video from, is responsible for choosing which quality is best for the user’s current and changing situation. This allows a content publisher to optimize their content so that it is viewed in the best possible light in all user capability scenarios as illustrated below. This is especially important for ‘premium’ content which is complimentary or competitive with television viewing.



Adaptive streaming doesn’t just apply to high quality HD content. It can also help benefit end users by providing an optimal version for SD content as well.

However, there are some caveats to this new technology. It won’t make a user’s experience better than their actual bandwidth, for example, if you only have 300 kbps of connectivity you’re not going to magically see HD quality. Additionally, although an end-user only ever connects to one stream at a time, one of the downsides of making higher quality content available is that it can increase your overall bandwidth/CDN delivery costs. Users on high speed cable and fiber optic networks will, for the most part, consume the highest quality stream available. Also, all of the additional outputs, used or not, consume more storage. With decreasing CDN delivery and storage cost, this is less frightening that it used to be.

In a nutshell, smooth/dynamic/adaptive streaming will show your video content in the best possible manner to all end-users, all the time.
For more information on the individual technologies, please see the following links:

• Microsoft Smooth Streaming
• Flash Dynamic Streaming
• Apple iPhone HTTP Streaming


Author - Forest Johns, VP of Solutions Engineering

Posted January 8th, 2010 - 2 comments

Is Online Video Here to Stay?

No matter your generation or your industry-specific career, we’re all trying to stay connected. With a slew of different outlets to choose from, the question is how brands and organizations should keep up with these communicative times. The obvious response is to communicate with your target audience, but the key is to make sure you familiarize yourself with how your particular customers communicate.

People are interactive beings. We not only relate better with person–to-person communications but also have a higher likelihood in trusting the message when both heard and seen. The common sense theory “seeing is believing” stuck for a reason which explains this phenomenon and can be tied to the explosion of online video.

Nearly half of the millennial generation (me included) have reached adulthood and in order to market to these individuals you need to understand their world. They are also the most exposed to new modes of communication such as chat, SMS, and online video. According to a Marketing Charts study http://tinyurl.com/ybou5k7 , the millennial personality communicates in a fast, reliable, frictionless, and honest manner.

So what do I mean by…

Fast
Attention spans vary depending on subject matter but still research has reached a consensus that after six minutes, a person’s attention span begins to decline. This creates a need for people to retain information in a timely fashion and more importantly in a stimulating way. Communicating visually is easier and quicker to comprehend opposed to stagnant text. Most video clips are 3 minutes or less, which fit perfectly into an average user’s attention span.

When I say fast, I’m also referring to the “contagiousness” of online video. Viral marketing is now one of the most powerful ways to promote online. Similar to SEO for text, video, too, can be used to optimize your online presence. It’s called Social Media Optimization, or SMO, through such networks as Del.icious, Reddit, Facebook, just to name a few. Google’s announcement for the real-time indexing of blogs, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and other content also increases the power of these mediums.

Reliable and Frictionless
In the past four years, we’ve seen the Internet community change from being tolerant of low quality YouTube video to now only being concerned with high performance and high quality video.

A perfect compare and contrast scenario is the Alicia Keys live concert vs. the U2 live concert. About a month ago, U2 streamed its first ever global webcast & after three hours worth of live music, the concert was then provided on-demand and turned out to be an unbelievable success http://tinyurl.com/yd6c6l7. Weeks later, Alicia Keys gave a live performance in support of World Aids Day but unlike prior live concert success, the Keys’ event was seen as an underwhelming experience with “… lots of buffering and pixilation…” http://tinyurl.com/ygybqnk

Honest Collaboration
A couple of years ago, the concept of User Generated Content commonly referred to as UGC began to circulate the web. And now, years later, brands and media companies are realizing its worth. UGC has changed business models allowing consumers to become involved with their brand of choice and participate in illustrating their emotional attachment to the brand. This type of customer engagement allows for brands to understand how their customers relate or perceive the brand.

Video has allowed for conversational communication and has empowered the collaborative world we live in. It fosters innovation and provokes different points of view. A company who uses the power of collaboration creates a trustworthy brand.



Author - Nicole Figueiredo, Marketing

Posted December 9th, 2009 - 0 comments

Origin Digital goes HD

Here at Origin Digital, we are frequently asked to explain just what HD, or high definition, means in the online world. The conversation normally starts when the client asks for a “widescreen” player size (16:9 aspect ratio) which has become popular on social media sites such as YouTube who recently switch their default player to widescreen. This is also driven by the explosion of HD television sets in the home, and the closer fit of the widescreen format to our vision (we see in wide screen). HD online is actually more about making that content accessible to everyone versus making sure they can view it at the same quality as on their TV. HD online can be examined using the following characteristics:

• Source format
• Aspect ratio
• Encoding bit rate
• Video size (height by width)

Source Format
As with all video, the available options for outputs are going to be largely driven by what was used to capture the video in the first place. As far as HD goes, there are two camera resolutions, 1280x720 (aka 720) and 1920x1080 (aka 1080). The “i" or “p” denote whether or not the frames of the video are interlaced, where each frame has only 50% of the detail that is flipped back and forth so that the eye perceives a full image, or progressive which displays full detail for each frame. Progressive is how desktop/laptop monitors display video, so anything that is to be displayed on the PC that isn’t progressive must be ‘de-interlaced’. In all instances, it is better to film in progressive if you can.

Aspect Ratio
Aspect ratio for HD is typically 16:9; others are available (16:10, 2.XX:1), but this is the most common. However, even if you filmed content in standard definition, you can still display your video in a widescreen player. This can be done in one of three methods; by having the player display black in the background on the left and right, encoding the video using pillarboxing, or stretching the video until the left and right edges are flush then cropping the top and bottom.



Encoding Bit Rate
HD doesn’t always have to be super high quality to give the end user a good experience. Although broadband has proliferated, not everyone can view 6-8 mbps video. As with all video online, it is important to give the user choices, or use one of the newer adaptive bit rate technologies to make that choice for them. A 16:9 formatted video can be as low as 300 kbps (with the correct corresponding size) or greater than 8 mbps. A ‘good’ top bit rate for HD, however, is anything over 1.5 mbps. This gives a good compromise between accessibility and viewability – especially when delivered over HTTP.

Video Size
Player size corresponds to the bit rate; as your bit rate decreases, so should your video size and vice versa. Players can either display video in a smaller area surrounded by black, or stretch the video to fit (up or down). As interactive options increase outside of the video player (real time feeds, chat, synchronized content, other viewing angles), more and more people are viewing content within a web page as opposed to increasing it to full screen like traditional TV viewing. This further decreases the need for pristine 720/1080 video sizes and bit rates.

You should always consider your audience and how they are consuming your content. If it is a high profile sporting event, then you probably want to push up the bit rate and video size as close to TV as possible. If it is enterprise content, then take advantage of the HD widescreen format but keep your video accessible for those on slower corporate networks as well as provide high quality options for work from home and external users. However, having the widescreen size available as your default player size is ideal as it will encourage people to shoot in HD while still maintaining backwards compatibility with legacy content in standard definition.


Author - Forest Johns, VP of Solutions Engineering

Posted November 18th, 2009 - 2 comments