Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Dark Helmet · Oct 11, 2006, 04:42 PM

I was going to post this a year ago but I guess I was in denial.

After years of Real, Microsoft and Apple fighting it out to win the streaming video war Flash comes out of nowhere and within 18 months has pretty much taken over for most browser based video.

Sure Quicktime is still king when it comes to quality and news sites are still taking the Real/Windows Media/Quicktime route but in terms of "web 2.0" content Flash has won.

Why? It looks like crap, has bad controls. Is it because it is cheap, easy, everyone has it and "good enough"?

Funny how years ago it was all about getting the best quality and suddenly the one with the worst quality swoops in and wins.

http://www.digital-web.com/articles/..._video_part_1/

Mithras · Oct 11, 2006, 05:09 PM

I know, it's bizarre and frustrating. I guess it just snuck in there with 99% browser penetration, and people suddenly realized it took away most of the "your video won't play!" issues.

Eriamjh · Oct 11, 2006, 05:09 PM

Flash is the VHS of the internet.

turtle777 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Flash is the VHS of the internet.

Sad, but true.

And unfortunately, flash video runs crappy on Macs.

-t

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

I was going to post this a year ago but I guess I was in denial.

After years of Real, Microsoft and Apple fighting it out to win the streaming video war Flash comes out of nowhere and within 18 months has pretty much taken over for most browser based video.

Sure Quicktime is still king when it comes to quality and news sites are still taking the Real/Windows Media/Quicktime route but in terms of "web 2.0" content Flash has won.

Why? It looks like crap, has bad controls. Is it because it is cheap, easy, everyone has it and "good enough"?

Funny how years ago it was all about getting the best quality and suddenly the one with the worst quality swoops in and wins.

Digital Web Magazine - The Rise of Flash Video, Part 1

Flash is just a wrapper for Quicktime movies. Quicktime has actually won, Flash is just the plug-in that won that is used to interact with the video. The playback controls in a Flash movie are left up to the designers, all Flash does is provide these mechanisms.

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 05:21 PM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Flash is the VHS of the internet.

Why? You can encode a QT movie anyway you want and stick it in a Flash movie/player... Blame the quality on the encoders of the video, not on Flash. Flash is not a video compression codec.

turtle777 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:21 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Flash is just a wrapper for Quicktime movies. Quicktime has actually won, Flash is just the plug-in that won that is used to interact with the video. The playback controls in a Flash movie are left up to the designers, all Flash does is provide these mechanisms.

So, is that the reason why some Flash movies play like sh!t (because it's not wrapping QT), and others are playing Ok ?

-t

Dark Helmet · Oct 11, 2006, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Flash is the VHS of the internet.

True and to make it worse it is like VHS coming out a year ago and beating DVD's and High-Def DVD's.

rickey939 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Flash is the VHS of the internet.

WMP is Betamax of the internet.

turtle777 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by rickey939

WMP is Betamax of the internet.

Dude, WTF ?

-t

rickey939 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Dude, WTF ?

-t

Yeah, it sucks.

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

So, is that the reason why some Flash movies play like sh!t (because it's not wrapping QT), and others are playing Ok ?

-t

I think the reason why some Flash movies play poorly is because the video is being stretched (e.g. Google Video) beyond the dimensions the video was encoded at. AFAIK, Flash doesn't work with Windows Media or Real Media, but if it did it would simply be a wrapper for these formats too.

Bad encoding is bad encoding. Flash is not a video codec.

(I'm no Flash fanboy either, far from it).

turtle777 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:35 PM

I noticed that many flash videos really task out the processor a lot. My fan starts spinning like crazy.

-t

Mithras · Oct 11, 2006, 05:36 PM

Flash video uses the Sorenson codec, but is it in a Quicktime wrapper? That wasn't my impression, but I don't know much about this.

besson3c · 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

True and to make it worse it is like VHS coming out a year ago and beating DVD's and High-Def DVD's.

It is quite possible to take your kick ass pristine QT movie, wrap it in a Flash wrapper, don't stretch the video, and guess what? It would look *absolutely* pixel per pixel identical. Flash just works with the files you throw at it, it doesn't compress or reencode (unless you embed the video into the Flash movie in which case there are compression settings designed to be optimal with vector artwork, but I'd be willing to bet that the Flash movies on YouTube and the like are simply providing controls to a previously encoded external file.

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Mithras

Flash video uses the Sorenson codec, but is it in a Quicktime wrapper? That wasn't my impression, but I don't know much about this.

I believe you can compress embedded movies, I take back what I said previously, but I'd be willing to bet that YouTube and Google and the like aren't compressing the video again, there would be little point, except to get the video to start playing immediately if desirable (which is a technique also utilized by many QT authors not using Flash). It makes no sense for YouTube to compress a user's video for them, it's just a waste of their resources... This would be my guess.

Flash movies themselves are extremely small, the additional overhead of playing a Flash movie vs. playing the same original Quicktime movie is negligable.

turtle777 · Oct 11, 2006, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

but I'd be willing to bet that YouTube and Google and the like aren't compressing the video again, there would be little point.

Of course there is a big point: if the originally submitted movie is not compressed well, it will cost huge $$$ on bandwidth and stoarge. I bet they ARE re-compressing it.

-t

TETENAL · Oct 11, 2006, 05:54 PM

Flash Video has nothing to do with QuickTime whatsoever.

Dark Helmet · Oct 11, 2006, 06:31 PM

Oh and my most hated thing about flash video is that it stops playing if the window it is in is not the foreground window!

Mithras · Oct 11, 2006, 06:34 PM

I think someone on Ars Technica coded up a little SIMBL plugin to fix that -- overriding Safari's windows so that they all think they're the frontmost window.

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Of course there is a big point: if the originally submitted movie is not compressed well, it will cost huge $$$ on bandwidth and stoarge. I bet they ARE re-compressing it.

-t

Maybe, but it's also expensive to encode video, although perhaps this represents a lesser expense than bandwidth and storage, I don't know.

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Flash Video has nothing to do with QuickTime whatsoever.

What do you mean? Are you talking about vector artwork produced in Flash, or in playing a digital movie through a Flash wrapper?

TETENAL · Oct 11, 2006, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

What do you mean? Are you talking about vector artwork produced in Flash, or in playing a digital movie through a Flash wrapper?

I'm talking about Flash Video flv. Maybe it uses a codec that is also available for QuickTime, but flv is not a wrapper around QuickTime.

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by TETENAL

I'm talking about Flash Video flv. Maybe it uses a codec that is also available for QuickTime, but flv is not a wrapper around QuickTime.

Isn't flv just the format for Flash-produced vector animations?

Scifience · Oct 11, 2006, 08:52 PM

I wish everyone would start using streaming DivX. It looks absolutely amazing - full screen streaming video in HD, as long as your connection supports it.

DivX has a beta site like YouTube that you can check out for a demo, but it doesn't work well on Mac: DivX Stage6: Upload Video Clips. Share, Watch, Download Videos

TETENAL · Oct 11, 2006, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Isn't flv just the format for Flash-produced vector animations?

No, flv is Flash Video, the video we are talking about in this thread as used by Youtube and Google Video. And it has nothing to do with QuickTime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLV

TETENAL · Oct 11, 2006, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by Scifience

I wish everyone would start using streaming DivX.

DivX is probably illegal, closed-source spyware. I don't wish anyone would use it.

MPEG is the way to go (like MPEG-4 H.264).

besson3c · Oct 11, 2006, 09:32 PM

I guess I was wrong, from the Wikipedia article:

FLV (Flash Video) is a file format used to deliver video over the Internet using Adobe Flash Player version 6, 7, 8, or 9. FLV content may also be embedded within SWF files. Notable users of the FLV format include Google Video, Reuters.com and YouTube. Flash Video is viewable on most operating systems, via the widely-available Macromedia Flash Player and web browser plug-in, or one of several third-party programs such as Media Player Classic (with the ffdshow codec installed), MPlayer, or VLC media player

Most FLV files use a variant of H.263 to encode the video. Some FLV files may instead use the screen codec, a simple animation composed of a sequence of screenshots. Flash Player 8 also supports On2 Technologies' VP6 codec. Support for encoding FLV files with the VP6 codec is provided by an encoding tool included with Adobe's Macromedia Flash Professional 8 product, On2's Flix encoding tools, Sorenson Squeeze, and some other third party tools.

It appears that FLV actually includes a compression codec used by these companies. However, one could also do what I described and just embed a QT movie, so Flash need not suck!

I guess I should have done a bit of research before making assumptions about what YouTube or Google are doing though

Eug Wanker · 10:56 PM

I HATE sites that use flv flash media players. Google and YouTube both use it, and consequently they both suck. I DESPISE both Google video and YouTube.

SciFi used to use QT, and it was OK. Now it uses Flash, and it sucks. Is it using flv too?

It's a royal pain in the ass trying to watch anything on these sites.

Originally Posted by Mithras

I know, it's bizarre and frustrating. I guess it just snuck in there with 99% browser penetration, and people suddenly realized it took away most of the "your video won't play!" issues.

??? Google video and YouTube video often stutter like mad on my Macs. This includes a G5 2.0 iMac, a MacBook 2.0, a G4 1.7 Cube, and an iMac Core 2 Duo 2.33.

Flash flv video has thrown internet video back 6 years as far as I'm concerned. Welcome to 2000.

Did I say I DESPISE YouTube and Google video? And yes the reason I despise them is simply because their video playback is just so painfully bad.

Visnaut · Oct 11, 2006, 11:59 PM

Flash video runs just fine on my 1.5Ghz Powerbook G4. Certainly no stuttering as soon as you have enough video buffered. Are you sure you're all running the latest version of Flash?

As much as you may or may not hate Flash video, it made this whole recent web video trend possible. Flash Player is a near ubiquitous platform, which not only can deliver video, but which you can build and develop rich media apps on much more easily than you could with Quicktime.

As for the quality of the video, it's a "garbage in, garbage out" thing. Since content is user-provided, it's probably already encoded badly, and then it has to be encoded again to FLV.

Eug Wanker · 12:10 AM

Originally Posted by Visnaut

Flash video runs just fine on my 1.5Ghz Powerbook G4. Certainly no stuttering as soon as you have enough video buffered. Are you sure you're all running the latest version of Flash?

Yes, and it's EXTREMELY irritating.

I install flash. It works for a few days. Then it starts to stutter. Nothing fixes it.
I reinstall flash. It works for a few days. Then it starts to stutter. Nothing fixes it.
Wash, rinse, repeat.

I have noticed this on multiple different machines, including both PowerPC and Intel Macs. (I own two of each.) It seems to work fine on my Windows boxes though.

As much as you may or may not hate Flash video, it made this whole recent web video trend possible.

You mean the trend of having video that plays like a slideshow? There's a reason why I hate Google video and YouTube so much. Honestly, I had more consistent video playback in 2004 than I do now.

Flash Player is a near ubiquitous platform, which not only can deliver video, but which you can build and develop rich media apps on much more easily than you could with Quicktime.

Ironically, at our workplace, none of the locked down machines have flash installed. Many have QT installed though.

Eug Wanker · Oct 12, 2006, 10:31 AM

My comments on that article:

This is really quite sad actually, considering that Flash video playback is overwhelmingly bad. The players are inconsistent, and oftentimes playback stutters like mad on Macs (including on my 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo machine).

We had good quality embedded playback in QT in 2004.
Fast forward to 2006 with flash sites becoming more popular, and playback is absolutely terrible.

BTW, Google video and and YouTube are the two sites I hate the most on the net right now for video playback.

I'm no lover of QT per se. I'm just a hater of flash video, at least on Macs. The actual image quality is fine. The part that causes all the ill will toward it is the fact that on some Macs (including top-of-the-line ones with all the appropriate updates) the playback is extremely choppy at times.

Ubiquitous and bad is faint praise in my opinion.

Perhaps it is due to bad flash coding I don't know, but when two huge sites like Google and YouTube have the exact same problems, one has to wonder if it's something else.

Dark Helmet · Oct 12, 2006, 10:51 AM

I have the problem on one of my computers where there is no sound on some flash video. Reinstalling Flash doesn't help.

I saw something on MacFixIt about having to open Audio MIDI Setup and change something to fix it but it didn't seem to work.

besson3c · Oct 12, 2006, 10:58 AM

Do these Flash related problems persist on Windows machines? If not, we probably have our answer right there why it has been so successful.

Perhaps this offends our senses, but for a long time we couldn't play certain WMP video either, and I still struggle with this format from time to time. We are probably better off now, in many ways.

turtle777 · Oct 12, 2006, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

I saw something on MacFixIt about having to open Audio MIDI Setup and change something to fix it but it didn't seem to work.

I have these darned sound issues all the time.

Most of the time, it's ok once I switch in Audio MIDI from 96000Hz to 44100 Hz.
Some also recommend starting Garageband, and then closing it.

Darn Apple, WTF ? This is a bug worthy of farking M$ / Windows.

-t

Eug Wanker · Oct 12, 2006, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Do these Flash related problems persist on Windows machines? If not, we probably have our answer right there why it has been so successful.

Yes, the files play fine on Windows, as you suspected.

I blame Adobe/Macromedia, but the end result is that I despise any site that uses flash video extensively.

Perhaps this offends our senses, but for a long time we couldn't play certain WMP video either, and I still struggle with this format from time to time. We are probably better off now, in many ways.

Here I disagree. Flip4Mac works fine for embedded WMP playback the most of the time. And of course, QT works fine on Macs pretty much all the time.

Flash? It's just so damn irritating, because even if you install the right stuff, it still has problems. Between my various machines, I've probably reinstalled flash 10 times now.

I give up. Most of the time I don't even bother clicking on YouTube links anymore, when people send them to me.

In terms of my preferences:

QT > WMP > Flash > Real

turtle777 · Oct 12, 2006, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Here I disagree. Flip4Mac works fine for embedded WMP playback the most of the time.

I disagree. I had many problems, including multiple re-installs with Flip4Mac.
It's still sort of shaky.

-t

besson3c · Oct 12, 2006, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Yes, the files play fine on Windows, as you suspected.

I blame Adobe/Macromedia, but the end result is that I despise any site that uses flash video extensively.

Here I disagree. Flip4Mac works fine for embedded WMP playback the most of the time. And of course, QT works fine on Macs pretty much all the time.

Flash? It's just so damn irritating, because even if you install the right stuff, it still has problems. Between my various machines, I've probably reinstalled flash 10 times now.

I give up. Most of the time I don't even bother clicking on YouTube links anymore, when people send them to me.

In terms of my preferences:

QT > WMP > Flash > Real

Look at how many years it took of crappy WMP support before Flip came out, and even when Flip came out, initially it didn't support streaming video.

I also have no clue why a new Mac user would think of downloading something called Flip4Mac to play WMP files, and then to manually associate .wmv and .avi files to Quicktime Player - this whole concept seems extremely awkward and confusing. Moreover, the fact that you have people encoding video and wrapping them in .avi wrappers is quite confusing. Why would it seem intuitive to users that some AVI video plays fine in Quicktime, while some requires a DivX player such as VLC?

I'm sure that things aren't a utopia on the Windows side either, but I wouldn't blow any of this off as a non-issue, there are still issues with WMV on the Mac.

Why doesn't Apple simply bundle DivX and WMV support into Quicktime and call it a day? They don't even have to support these codecs, just bundle them the same way they bundle many Unix utilities that they don't support.

Eug Wanker · Oct 12, 2006, 11:43 AM

I also have no clue why a new Mac user would think of downloading something called Flip4Mac to play WMP files

Because that's what Microsoft suggests to do.

I'm not blowing off the issues with WMV at all. I just think the situation with flash on Macs is far worse.

I'm not saying that Flash won't get better. I'm saying that the state of flash on Macs today is so bad, it can only get better.

Why doesn't Apple simply bundle DivX and WMV support into Quicktime and call it a day?

Because they are competing formats, that take away from QT penetration.

I think the real threat to them was WMV. I don't consider DivX a true threat, as I think it's a format that is already dead for the mainstream. In reality, DivX is a bootlegger format. Few in their right mind would make DivX the standard format for their website, cuz basically the only people that use it are BitTorrenters.

screamingFit · Oct 12, 2006, 11:56 AM

My biggest problem with YouTube is that I have NEVER been able to watch something in it's entirety before the stream dies. Usually takes about a minute and I have to reload the page only to have it get a little farther than before. Therefore, I usually ignore anybody sending me over there to watch anything.

Google video, OTOH, streaming works great and the download feature is great. And just rename those .gvp extensions to .avi and no problem using another player to watch.

besson3c · Oct 12, 2006, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Because they are competing formats, that take away from QT penetration.

Why? I'm not suggesting that users should be allowed to encode in QT, just playback. If any, it will increase the QT player's penetratration since the Player would be able to play far more than it can now. Leave the official QT supported codecs as encode options, but provide the other codecs for playback out of courtesy. I really don't buy the argument that people will whine and complain to content providers that their video is in DivX when they really want QT... As long as it can be played, they are happy. These format wars only piss off consumers anyway.

There are several old and obsolete codecs included in QT anyway that nobody uses.

TETENAL · Oct 12, 2006, 02:12 PM

DivX: It is probably violating patents. Apple could not support it without getting in legal trouble. And there's no need to since the official MPEG-4 is just as good.

Windows Media: Is owned by Microsoft and Apple would have to pay licensing fees to use it. In addition to the licensing fees they already pay for the MPEG formats (and possibly others). Why would Apple send Microsoft a cheque on a regular basis when Windows users can play Windows Media with the built-in player and Mac users can download Flip4Mac already? It doesn't make business sense to financially support the competing format.