This year at work the IT department is clamping down (as per the friggin management) and decided to firewall all internet streaming.
Now of all times as Apple has miraculously decided to allow a livestream of their event!!!!!
!!!!!ARGH!!!!!
Why don't you just watch on an iPhone. HTTP Live Streaming should work fine over 3G. They may not have this form of streaming blocked too. Kinda hard to block something that is plain old HTTP (unless they block apple.com).
Oh damn, I am driving home from the White Mountains in NH to Florida and will miss it!
In addition to iPhones, you could use a 3G iPad. There's 3G coverage along i-95 except for a continuous dead stretch between Richmond and Jacksonville.
It isn't just html5video Apple is using. They are using HTTP Live Streaming. Apple has put it forward as a open standard but right now it only works on Snow Leopard and only in Safari (Chrome will not work) or on iOS3+. If you have a Windows PC no browser will enable you to watch the live feed, not even Safari for Windows.
Really? I thought http streaming was baked into quicktime. Thanks for pointing that out, let's hope it comes over to Windows side as soon as possible.
Edit: I guess is only baked into QTX, which has not made it over to Win yet.
In addition to iPhones, you could use a 3G iPad. There's 3G coverage along i-95 except for a continuous dead stretch between Richmond and Jacksonville.
hehe I thought you were going to say ?except for a continuous dead stretch between Miami, Florida and the Canadian border in Maine.?
Much as I'd love to see html5 quickly take over from from Flash I don't see how Apple providing a video stream spells the death of Flash. You can do live streaming with Flash and it isn't doesn't restrict your audience to people with Safari on MacOS10.6 / iOS3.0 or higher. In fact Apple's move might strengthen Flash's position as it highlights how limited the audience is for the non-Flash alternative.
This isn't strictly HTML5 streaming. Apple has their own extensions to HTML5 video called HTTP Live streaming. It was created for live video. It was also created to be friendlier to AT&Ts network with automatic bit rate switching then alternatives. HTML5 allows for multiple bit rates, but I don't think it can automatically switch between them if network bandwidth degrades.
This also isn't Quicktime Streaming Server... someone else seemed confused by this. So no support in Quicktime 7 which is used on Windows and OS X 10.5 and earlier.
This isn't strictly HTML5 streaming. Apple has their own extensions to HTML5 video called HTTP Live streaming. It was created to make streams that are friendly to AT&Ts network. This was mainly created for the iPhone. HTML5 video has wider support and is improving quickly. Especially now that Firefox has no excuse not to support it.
This also isn't Quicktime Streaming Server... someone else seemed confused by this.
1) HTML5 doesn?t offer streaming. It offers media tags that other services can utilize.
2) HTTP Live Streaming isn?t an Apple service.
3) Mozilla has been supporting HTML5 and the HTML5 media tags for a long time now. What they don?t support is the MPEG-LA H.264 codec.
4) I think you?re right that it was born out of a need for variable streaming on cellular networks, but it?s definitely a useful tool for the web in general. It?s the most adaptive and versatile efficient streaming method I?ve seen and it?s open to all. I have to wonder now if QuickTime will be getting a major overhaul for Windows tomorrow.
1) HTML5 doesn’t offer streaming. It offers media tags that other services can utilize.
2) HTTP Live Streaming isn’t an Apple service.
3) Mozilla has been supporting HTML5 and the HTML5 media tags for a long time now. What they don’t support is the MPEG-LA H.264 codec.
4) I think you’re right that it was born out of a need for variable streaming on cellular networks, but it’s definitely a useful tool for the web in general. It’s the most adaptive and versatile efficient streaming method I’ve seen and it’s open to all. I have to wonder now if QuickTime will be getting a major overhaul for Windows tomorrow.
HTML5 video does offer streaming. It just doesn't offer live streaming.
In fact the streaming support is tied to HTTP 1.1 features that allow the web client to "seek" to any position in a file hosted on the server. It was originally created to resume downloads. All modern web servers support this feature, so HTML5 video sorta gets streaming for free since web servers do not need to add support for this. Web clients need support, but I think all clients that support HTML5 video can do this.
HTML5 video does offer streaming. It is just limited to a fixed bit rate, so Apple came up with HTTP Live Streaming to better support switching between edge, 3G, and broadband.
Interesting. I was not aware. Do you have any links so i can educate myself on the codecs and bitrate it does support for streaming? I thought it was limited to media tags that didn’t discriminate against such things.
Quote:
In fact the streaming support is tied to HTTP 1.1 features that allow the web client to "seek" to any position in a file hosted on the server. It was originally created to resume downloads. All modern web servers support this feature, so HTML5 video sorta gets streaming for free since web servers do not need to add support for this. Web clients need support, but I think all clients that support HTML5 video can do this.
Interesting. I was not aware. Do you have any links so i can educate myself on the codecs and bitrate it does support for streaming? I thought it was limited to media tags that didn’t discriminate against such things.
That I’m aware of.
Obviously it HTML5 video supports (at least) H.264. Single bit rate was a little bit of an over simplification. It supports multiple codecs and bit rates, just not automatic switching between them when bandwidth changes. I'm not sure if that is a real limitation or just that web browsers have not done anything about it yet. The main advantage to HTTP Live Streaming is that it can switch on demand. It is also capable of live feeds but I don't know if any server side software exists for this yet but Apple obviously has something. I don't think HTML5 video can do live feeds... but I may be wrong.
Obviously it HTML5 video supports (at least) H.264. Single bit rate was a little bit of an over simplification. It supports multiple codecs and bit rates, just not automatic switching between them when bandwidth changes. The main advantage to HTTP Live Streaming is that it can switch on demand. It is also capable of live feeds but I don't know if any server side software exists for this yet. I don't think HTML5 video can do live feeds... but I may be wrong.
1) You?ve lost me again. When I read ?support? followed by the naming of a specific codec or protocol I interpret that as support for that specific codec or protocol with clear documentation of how it?s supported in the white papers. I already stated that the HTML5 media tags doesn?t support for any one codec or group of codecs.. and for good reason. WebKit-based browsers and IE9 support H.264 codec in the browser, Firefox does not, but they all support HTML5 media tags.
2) That looks like the link I provided in post #60.
There's an very good chance they won't pick this up. The traffic will be going over HTTP and look like normal web traffic. Just keep quiet about it tomorrow and tune in and try your luck.
Because they're lazy.
Wait, but what is this thing about it only viewable on mac and ios devices? I'm not running safari on my work pc but IE7 without flash and no quicktime.
I think it's safe to say that I'm going to have to watch it on my ipod touch where there is wifi.
It was a Wi-Fi problem. 570 base stations equals pollution.
Were they trying to share 3G with several laptops at once? Why not just use a USB modem for each laptop. I don't get the MiFi stuff. Maybe because I don't like to share. Or I guess I don't mind plugging the USB dongle in my laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justbobf
So, Apple Insider and a hundred other blogs will still have it's own live coverage, resulting an another 570 base stations? So, what will be different? BTW, since Apple is going live, why doesn't Apple Insider give Apple a break...offer an intelligent analysis after the event?
Well, Apple has to start somewhere. I don't think it will mitigate the MiFi issues at this stage. Liveblogging will still be relevant. I think this is more for Apple being able to get the message out first hand and at the same time start pushing HTML 5 HARD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub
I thought we would never return to these days. I will have to tune in now and I am OK limiting the users to basically iOS devices and 10.6 users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister
Live stream...must be good.
Extra coffee and popcorn; I am sooo staying up for this. Just hope that Steve announces that TV show and movie rentals are coming to Japan.
Berger... Wassuppp
Lmiting the HTML stream should be great. I feel exclusive but more relevant it means I have a real chance of actually watching the video because of less users.
Comments
Get this......
This year at work the IT department is clamping down (as per the friggin management) and decided to firewall all internet streaming.
Now of all times as Apple has miraculously decided to allow a livestream of their event!!!!!
Why don't you just watch on an iPhone. HTTP Live Streaming should work fine over 3G. They may not have this form of streaming blocked too. Kinda hard to block something that is plain old HTTP (unless they block apple.com).
Oh damn, I am driving home from the White Mountains in NH to Florida and will miss it!
In addition to iPhones, you could use a 3G iPad. There's 3G coverage along i-95 except for a continuous dead stretch between Richmond and Jacksonville.
It isn't just html5video Apple is using. They are using HTTP Live Streaming. Apple has put it forward as a open standard but right now it only works on Snow Leopard and only in Safari (Chrome will not work) or on iOS3+. If you have a Windows PC no browser will enable you to watch the live feed, not even Safari for Windows.
Really? I thought http streaming was baked into quicktime. Thanks for pointing that out, let's hope it comes over to Windows side as soon as possible.
Edit: I guess is only baked into QTX, which has not made it over to Win yet.
In addition to iPhones, you could use a 3G iPad. There's 3G coverage along i-95 except for a continuous dead stretch between Richmond and Jacksonville.
hehe I thought you were going to say ?except for a continuous dead stretch between Miami, Florida and the Canadian border in Maine.?
Much as I'd love to see html5 quickly take over from from Flash I don't see how Apple providing a video stream spells the death of Flash. You can do live streaming with Flash and it isn't doesn't restrict your audience to people with Safari on MacOS10.6 / iOS3.0 or higher. In fact Apple's move might strengthen Flash's position as it highlights how limited the audience is for the non-Flash alternative.
This isn't strictly HTML5 streaming. Apple has their own extensions to HTML5 video called HTTP Live streaming. It was created for live video. It was also created to be friendlier to AT&Ts network with automatic bit rate switching then alternatives. HTML5 allows for multiple bit rates, but I don't think it can automatically switch between them if network bandwidth degrades.
This also isn't Quicktime Streaming Server... someone else seemed confused by this. So no support in Quicktime 7 which is used on Windows and OS X 10.5 and earlier.
This isn't strictly HTML5 streaming. Apple has their own extensions to HTML5 video called HTTP Live streaming. It was created to make streams that are friendly to AT&Ts network. This was mainly created for the iPhone. HTML5 video has wider support and is improving quickly. Especially now that Firefox has no excuse not to support it.
This also isn't Quicktime Streaming Server... someone else seemed confused by this.
1) HTML5 doesn?t offer streaming. It offers media tags that other services can utilize.
2) HTTP Live Streaming isn?t an Apple service.
3) Mozilla has been supporting HTML5 and the HTML5 media tags for a long time now. What they don?t support is the MPEG-LA H.264 codec.
4) I think you?re right that it was born out of a need for variable streaming on cellular networks, but it?s definitely a useful tool for the web in general. It?s the most adaptive and versatile efficient streaming method I?ve seen and it?s open to all. I have to wonder now if QuickTime will be getting a major overhaul for Windows tomorrow.
1) HTML5 doesn’t offer streaming. It offers media tags that other services can utilize.
2) HTTP Live Streaming isn’t an Apple service.
3) Mozilla has been supporting HTML5 and the HTML5 media tags for a long time now. What they don’t support is the MPEG-LA H.264 codec.
4) I think you’re right that it was born out of a need for variable streaming on cellular networks, but it’s definitely a useful tool for the web in general. It’s the most adaptive and versatile efficient streaming method I’ve seen and it’s open to all. I have to wonder now if QuickTime will be getting a major overhaul for Windows tomorrow.
HTML5 video does offer streaming. It just doesn't offer live streaming.
In fact the streaming support is tied to HTTP 1.1 features that allow the web client to "seek" to any position in a file hosted on the server. It was originally created to resume downloads. All modern web servers support this feature, so HTML5 video sorta gets streaming for free since web servers do not need to add support for this. Web clients need support, but I think all clients that support HTML5 video can do this.
HTML5 video does offer streaming. It is just limited to a fixed bit rate, so Apple came up with HTTP Live Streaming to better support switching between edge, 3G, and broadband.
Interesting. I was not aware. Do you have any links so i can educate myself on the codecs and bitrate it does support for streaming? I thought it was limited to media tags that didn’t discriminate against such things.
In fact the streaming support is tied to HTTP 1.1 features that allow the web client to "seek" to any position in a file hosted on the server. It was originally created to resume downloads. All modern web servers support this feature, so HTML5 video sorta gets streaming for free since web servers do not need to add support for this. Web clients need support, but I think all clients that support HTML5 video can do this.
That I’m aware of.
Interesting. I was not aware. Do you have any links so i can educate myself on the codecs and bitrate it does support for streaming? I thought it was limited to media tags that didn’t discriminate against such things.
That I’m aware of.
Obviously it HTML5 video supports (at least) H.264. Single bit rate was a little bit of an over simplification. It supports multiple codecs and bit rates, just not automatic switching between them when bandwidth changes. I'm not sure if that is a real limitation or just that web browsers have not done anything about it yet. The main advantage to HTTP Live Streaming is that it can switch on demand. It is also capable of live feeds but I don't know if any server side software exists for this yet but Apple obviously has something. I don't think HTML5 video can do live feeds... but I may be wrong.
HTTP Live Streaming docs:
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/li...roduction.html
Antennagate doesn't affect Wi-Fi reception, geniuses.
That shut them up.
Thank you.
Obviously it HTML5 video supports (at least) H.264. Single bit rate was a little bit of an over simplification. It supports multiple codecs and bit rates, just not automatic switching between them when bandwidth changes. The main advantage to HTTP Live Streaming is that it can switch on demand. It is also capable of live feeds but I don't know if any server side software exists for this yet. I don't think HTML5 video can do live feeds... but I may be wrong.
HTTP Live Streaming docs:
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/li...roduction.html
1) You?ve lost me again. When I read ?support? followed by the naming of a specific codec or protocol I interpret that as support for that specific codec or protocol with clear documentation of how it?s supported in the white papers. I already stated that the HTML5 media tags doesn?t support for any one codec or group of codecs.. and for good reason. WebKit-based browsers and IE9 support H.264 codec in the browser, Firefox does not, but they all support HTML5 media tags.
2) That looks like the link I provided in post #60.
Will Apple still post a video of the event on Apple.com later on?
They always do, so I assume they will.
So what's the user agent for Safari on a Mac running 10.6?
Good luck with that as it's not the issue....
So what's the user agent for Safari on a Mac running 10.6?
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.8 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.1 Safari/533.17.8
But as stated several times the limitation is not artificial. Only 10.6 and iOS v3.0 or later have support for HTTP Live Streaming.
"Viewing requires either a Mac running Safari on Mac OS X version 10.6 Snow Leopard..."
Why is 10.6 necessary to watch a live stream? That's a rotten shame.
Haven't you heard? PPC Macs don't support "open standards" muah ha ha ha ha
As for me, I will be snuggled nicely in bed with mah iPad woots
There's an very good chance they won't pick this up. The traffic will be going over HTTP and look like normal web traffic. Just keep quiet about it tomorrow and tune in and try your luck.
Because they're lazy.
Wait, but what is this thing about it only viewable on mac and ios devices? I'm not running safari on my work pc but IE7 without flash and no quicktime.
I think it's safe to say that I'm going to have to watch it on my ipod touch where there is wifi.
Unless someone says something different.
What was Steve's hand position when he lost the signal?
I would say giving the audience the bird.
It was a Wi-Fi problem. 570 base stations equals pollution.
Were they trying to share 3G with several laptops at once? Why not just use a USB modem for each laptop. I don't get the MiFi stuff. Maybe because I don't like to share. Or I guess I don't mind plugging the USB dongle in my laptop.
So, Apple Insider and a hundred other blogs will still have it's own live coverage, resulting an another 570 base stations? So, what will be different? BTW, since Apple is going live, why doesn't Apple Insider give Apple a break...offer an intelligent analysis after the event?
Well, Apple has to start somewhere. I don't think it will mitigate the MiFi issues at this stage. Liveblogging will still be relevant. I think this is more for Apple being able to get the message out first hand and at the same time start pushing HTML 5 HARD.
I thought we would never return to these days. I will have to tune in now and I am OK limiting the users to basically iOS devices and 10.6 users.
Live stream...must be good.
Extra coffee and popcorn; I am sooo staying up for this. Just hope that Steve announces that TV show and movie rentals are coming to Japan.
Berger... Wassuppp
Lmiting the HTML stream should be great. I feel exclusive but more relevant it means I have a real chance of actually watching the video because of less users.