3 Comments

Summary:

Miro, nee Democracy Player, released its version 1.0 Tuesday, officially leaving beta behind. The open source video subscription, download and viewing client from the Participatory Culture Foundation (PCF) hopes to be not just more open, but more popular than other online video services. The organization is […]

Miro, nee Democracy Player, released its version 1.0 Tuesday, officially leaving beta behind. The open source video subscription, download and viewing client from the Participatory Culture Foundation (PCF) hopes to be not just more open, but more popular than other online video services.

miro-intro-00.jpg

The organization is reporting more than 200,000 downloads per month leading up to the launch. “We expect to have more users than Joost by January,” said PCF Executive Director Nicholas Reville in a statement. We’d be remiss to let a boast like that fly by; we’ll check back in January and let you know.

Our take: If Miro’s latest version proves as reliable as the open source Video LAN Client (VLC), if it adds broad portable device support, if it somehow enables easy subscription from within embeds, and if it otherwise becomes the recommended client alternative to installed apps like iTunes/QuickTime and Windows Media Player by IT professionals across America, it’s got a shot at the big time.

For now, Miro uses the popular BitTorrent protocol for downloading and sharing content, and supports whatever video formats VLC can handle — which is almost anything without DRM, in my experience. The interface is familiar to any iTunes user, and the directory of “channels” indexed by the PCF has grown to 2,700 shows. I’m happy to be able to plug MeFeedia’s NaVloPoMo feed (that’s National Vlog Posting Month to you) into Miro’s channels (not to mention my OPML file), but I’m a fringe case.

miro-cat-011.jpg

While the Democracy Player was an early NewTeeVee favorite, glitchy playback and crashes kept us from using it heavily (or recommending it) for reasons beyond its open platform rhetoric and underdog status. Now it’s competing in a crowded field, where Joost is an early favorite, but Babelgum and Veoh are also well-funded, and clients like the new Tubular are coming out all the time.

Miro and the Participatory Culture Foundation’s hopes seem to lie in becoming the Firefox of online video (and it’s more than a coincidence; Mozilla, the maker of Firefox, has provided funding and advising to PCF). The problem is, Firefox is the Firefox of online video, since watching video in-browser is the norm on laptops and desktops in my experience (and Miro doesn’t seem to offer any features related to portable devices). I worry that Miro will instead become the Google Reader of online video — a great, incredibly useful application without mainstream traction.

miro-mefeedia-02.jpg

  1. We don’t think you are a fringe case, Jackson. ok, maybe a little. :)

    It will be interesting to see what Mainstream appeal Miro has. We think offering a Web-based solution with a powerful download client is a winning combination (btw, you can use your OPML file to import your subscriptions into Mefeedia too).

    Web (i.e. Flash) is certainly the mainstream norm now, but as HD becomes more pervasive, people will need clients like Miro. The question is really what is mainstream media TV shows going to do to support platforms like Miro…

    Share
  2. Don’t you think it’s interesting that Democracy Player and Miro are a non-profit, having started out with donation dollars and no revenue requirements from their funders, competing against for-profit companies?

    The IRS prohibits this, because it means that a non-profit can get tax deductible donations from funders, to create competition with companies that have to figure out how to get post-tax dollar investment, and make revenue.

    It also means that the Democracy Player or Miro can use code that is open source, under the GPL, to provide features that for-profit companies are prohibited from using GPL based code.

    It’s wrong that to treat them the same as for-profit companies, it’s wrong that they are competing with for-profit companies, and it’s wrong that they can use GPL code and pre-tax investment, that effectively means all us taxpayers underwrite, to make software that is marketed against for-profit companies.

    They are unethical at this point, and I would encourage you to investigate and report on their origins, status, funders and founders, and talk about this.

    Otherwise, you are supporting them as well.

    Share
  3. [...] Miro Makes Its Move into a Crowded Field at sister site [...]

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post