[qi:032] Dave Winer wrote a poignant post this week about President-elect Barack Obama’s interview on “60 Minutes,” prompting me to actually go to the CBS web site in search of the most-watched “60 Minutes” episode…ever. It was hard to find the video on CBS.com, and only after I searched for it on Google did I end up at CBSNews.com, where the video interview — along with a full transcript — is available. That alone was an annoying experience, though the viewing experience got worse with time.
The interview was engaging, illuminating and informative — a throwback to a classic style of journalism that has been largely lost in this era of sound bites and bombastic proclamations and the drone-like newscasts on cable TV channels. But the viewing experience was ruined by a video that would stop, freeze and restart every so often.I did the speed check on my broadband connection and also checked if my wireless router was working properly — it all looked good. Beyond this, it could have been one of many problems — network congestion on my ISP’s network, congestion in the intercity networks, or perhaps CBS’s content delivery network wasn’t up to snuff. Or maybe CBS’s servers were simply overwhelmed by the demand for the Obama interview.
One way or another, it’s not just a CBS problem; problems like this can be found on almost all services — including YouTube, even despite having the unfair advantage of being hosted on Google’s infrastructure. There are too many points of failure when it comes to web video. These problems are only going to increase in the near future as more and more of us are going to watch more and more video online. According to a study by IBM, nearly 76 percent of consumers surveyed said that they watch video on their personal computers, indicating that watching videos on the web is quickly becoming as mainstream an activity as sending emails and instant messages.
And yet we continue to have a marginal experience with web videos. There is a lot of talk about offering HD-like videos on the web, but if the networks and the infrastructure can’t really deliver that experience seamlessly, then we have a problem.
http://www.cbs.com/thunder/swf30can10cbsnews/rcpHolderCbs-3-4×3.swf
Watch CBS Videos Online
Hulu gets it right, Fox News gets it right.
• Hulu: experiencing increasing success!
• Fox News: experiencing increasing success!
Meanwhile… CNN can’t get it right. CBS can’t get it right. Local TV news affiliates, totally hopeless.
• CNN: declining ratings.
• CBS: declining ratings, bad press.
• Local TV affiliates: plummeting ratings.
Wow, I see a correlation!
Memo to online video publishers: Contact Keynote (keynote.com) and sign up for their Streaming Perspective service. It will tell you what your video looks like to end users all over the world.Then take that data and beat up your CDN, stream host, IT guy, etc … Until it is rock solid.
Reliable online video IS possible. I know – I’ve seen the data. But you can’t fix whatyou can’t measure.
Disclaimer: I don’t work for Keynote but I was cofounder of Streamcheck which they bought and turned into Streaming Perspective a few years ago.
Flash and / or Streaming are the issue, and even worst : unicasted streaming in Flash ! That is the worst thing to do, and that’s what almost everybody has adopted thinking stupidely than that would fix copyright issues… or perhaps because of a lack of initiative from the developper (youtube did it, so let’s do the same)
Progressive download + CDN, P2P, multicasting (if you really want to deal with live broadcast) are much better solutions.
Has anybody had any issue with viewing trailer in Quicktime on the Apple web site ?
That is QuickTime + Progressive download + efficient CDN
My choice would go to Miro + podcast associated to P2P files
@randy : Hulu does not count : its access is limited to the US
- Foxnews does not use streaming but progressive download
[...] tackles web video’s dirty secret: It doesn’t always work Interesting post from Om Malik on GigaOm yesterday pointing out one of the problems with online video that people like me who believe [...]
Have to confess I often gloss over this in my coverage of online video. It’s such an amazing convenience (and the hour a week people spend with this emerging medium validates that), that’s it’s easy to be so happy to have it that you will endure some annoyance.
But that only lasts so long. There comes a time when the newness of online video wears off and you start to want it to be as reliable as the TV you grew up with. Sometimes I hear cable execs make this point in hopes that it means that online video will be a fad, a fling we dabble with until we realize what we really want — cable — was right there all along. I appreciate their optimism, but I don’t share it. In the end, online video is a game changer, and your correct observation that it is often terrible only motivates CDNs and networks to improve their technology so that these experiences get better.
Thanks for starting this conversation. I’m going to take it to my clients and readers to hear how frustrated they are:
http://omnivideo.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/om-malik-tackles-web-videos-dirty-secret-it-doesnt-always-work/
I agree with James McQuivey, watching TV on a PC window that rebuffers even on a good broadband connection gets old pretty fast. Even Hulu, which is better than most, suffers from this.
The technology exists to create an internet video viewing experience on a 50″ HDTV that is virtually indistinguishable from a locally attached DVD player. CDNs have already tackled much of the problem, now it’s time to address the portion of the delivery network CDNs don’t control: the broadband access infrastructure.
Unfortunately, doing that will require a newly emboldened Government do something that is not in its DNA. Namely, refrain from regulating.
Regarding Kevin’s comments: If you think watching streaming videos in the North America can be problematic, try viewing from most Latin American, Asian, Middle East, Australian…..and other places far far away. However (and I know this sounds seld serving – sorry) but many ISPs in those areas have figured out that the way to solve the end-to-end streaming problems (congested Transit, peering and access links) is to appropriately use caching at the edge of the network. Less congestion, more pleasing, costs less.
“That alone was an annoying experience”
I watch a lot of web video on my HDTV including NewTeeVee Live last week (http://pctvcables.com/newteevee). Now that was an annoying experience!
@Kevin Walsh
You think the broadband duopoly, whose television business plans rely on lack of competition from the Internet, are going improve our Internet video experience through less regulation? What incentive does Verizon, who is counting on traditional TV revenue to pay for FiOS, have to improve your ability to circumvent their TV services and watch stuff via the Internet? You must also buy into the propaganda that bandwidth caps are being implemented to improve QOS. I’ve worked for these companies. They value control of their networks beyond even profitability, let alone customer satisfaction. Cost of entry is far too high to have real competition anytime soon, so the only possible answer is regulation. There is a very good reason Teddy Roosevelt is on Mt Rushmore — proper regulation is the best friend of capitalism, not its mortal enemy.
Be careful with the implicit conclusion that duopolies are one short step away from monopolies. This is a fiercely competitive duopoly that has given us 60% broadband penetration, steadily decreasing prices and increasing speeds. Let’s keep regulators as far from this as we can get them.
I’ve also been on record, here and elsewhere, maintaining that caps are ill-advised and will backfire.
But it would depress me to think, as you evidently do, that we’re done building access networks (because the “cost of entry is far too high”) and we’re going to have to live with what we have. I do not believe this to be the case but there is one sure way to make it so–regulate it.