ICANN meeting webcast technology

Submitted by Adrian Kinderis on Sun, 2008-03-23 08:43.
Just a quick note to ICANN staff (perhaps Kieren). Why is real player the only player used for the webcast at ICANN meetings? Is it not possible utilise some of the other "newer" technologies (Flash etc) as used by You Tube. They are a little less invasive. Thanks.

Comments

Streaming

Submitted by kieren.mccarthy on Tue, 2008-03-25 08:42.
Hi Adrian, The short answer is: ICANN invested in the Real streaming technology at the time when streaming video was what everyone was clammering for. Real was, and probably still is, the best technology for doing that - sending live video out on the Net. We are currently reviewing the approach to webcasting and that may involve some changes. If people want streaming live video, however, Flash is not good at all. Nor are most systems that people will know. But we are considering filming events during the day and archiving them as fast as possible after the event; sticking them up online, where technologies like Flash would come in useful. I hope that helps explain. Please feel free to get back if you have other questions. Kieren

Real isn't the only real deal.

Submitted by atomdns on Tue, 2008-04-01 00:57.
I disagree. There are a variety of technologies out there that can provide live streaming content, including ones that are free and based on Java as opposed to some proprietary technology. If you want interaction, either through voice or a chat window, well there's plenty of that around too, once again, even from the free and open source community. Here are _some_ links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_video http://www.scvi.net/stream/soft.htm http://www.streamingmedia.com/ I think the philosophy from ICANN should be to provide content that would technically satisfy the widest possible audience whilst requiring the least amount of effort from the user. As an IT admin, I am loathe to install bloat-ware from the major providers (and yes I include Microsoft's Media Player in there as well) when there are alternatives that provide the same service without the proprietary hassles.

Preaching to converted

Submitted by kieren.mccarthy on Tue, 2008-04-01 01:08.
Hi AtomDNS, Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we are going to stick with Real or that we can't change it and there are no alternatives. Not at all. I was just seeking to explain where we were and why. When the need for streaming video was expressed by the community years ago, the approaches available now - particularly the open source ones - were not in place. But for several meetings we have been running Java chatrooms through open source phpFreeChat. This site is running on Drupal - allowing for alot of interaction and user-created content. The reality is that we have to work one step at a time because of limited resources and the webcast is watched by a very small number of people, so it comes down the bottom of the list for changing. I hope this answers your concerns, Kieren