Enterprise Video Market and Vendors Growing Nicely: VBrick Raises $11.9 Million

Vbrick-logo-new
With all the talk of video in the broadcast and entertainment verticals, it seems that enterprise based video offerings are rarely written about anymore. I can't remember the last time I read a really in-depth article on video inside the enterprise. This is a shame as there are a lot of major video deployments and continued video adoption taking place within the enterprise market, inside the firewall.

As opposed to content delivery networks, who for the most part are focusing on just delivering bits, vendors offering products and services for enterprise video are tackling more complex issues like video content management, self-provisioned webcasting and other pieces of the entire video ecosystem.

One of these vendors, VBrick, announced this morning a new round of funding totaling $11.9M from existing investors, with room for a strategic investor in the future. VBrick has seen nice growth over the past few years and has shipped more than 40,000 products to more than 5,000 customers. While VentureBeat.com is reporting that VBrick "brought in $30 million in revenue last year", that number is a few years old and is low by more than 30%. While VentureBeat.com also says that Vbrick has "been helped along the way by a partnership with Akamai Technologies", Vbrick's "Broadcast" product uses multiple CDNs and they have had partnerships with Akamai, Limelight, PowerStream and others for many years now.

VBrick says the additional money raised will go towards continuing their growth and possible acquisitions as VBrick's target customer has quickly evolved from mid-sized companies and universities to major Fortune 500 corporations.

Sponsored by

Microsoft & Akamai Announce “Smooth Streaming”, New HD Video Delivery Via HTTP

SmothHD_logo
This morning, Microsoft and Akamai announced a future new video delivery service dubbed “smooth streaming”, designed to deliver HD video quality over the HTTP protocol. Using chunked encoding, the new technology will adapt the quality of the video stream in real time based upon the viewer’s connectivity speed, also called “adaptive streaming”. The service, which will run off of Microsoft’s newly announced Web server technology called Internet Information Services 7.0 (IIS7.0), will utilize Silverlight for playback.

Currently in beta with a few Akamai customers, Akamai has also launched a new website at smoothhd.com to showcase the technology. The new Akamai service, dubbed “Akamai AdaptiveEdge Streaming for Microsoft Silverlight” will be available to select Akamai customers in a beta release in early 2009. While smooth streaming will be an upcoming feature of IIS7 Media Pack
and technically available to other content delivery networks over time, Akamai is the first content delivery network to work with Microsoft to enable the functionality.

While it is too early to know what other CDNs will support the technology down the road, Microsoft made it clear that Akamai has worked with them to help develop the technology and enable the workflow to make this happen. When asked if this technology would be exclusive to Akamai, Microsoft would only comment to say, “Akamai is the first CDN to roll out this service”. How long Akamai will be the only CDN in the market with this new service is unknown, especially since there is no word as to when in 2009 this will come out of beta. But Microsoft is a platform company so you can bet that over time, other CDNs will also adopt the service.

When launched, the new service will not have support for live streaming and won’t work for videos that are downloaded to the desktop and played back at a later time. In addition, content owners who want to take advantage of the new service will have to re-encode their entire video library to utilize the new technology.

While the new service will enable content owners to deliver HD bits across Akamai’s HTTP based servers, which is a lot more scalable than their streaming infrastructure, the real question that remains is how Akamai will charge for this new service. Delivering HD quality bits has always been more expensive and Akamai did acknowledge that the price was going to play a key factor in being able to sell the service. Since video will be delivered from Akamai’s HTTP based infrastructure, the cost to deliver video should be much cheaper and more scalable than delivering video from their streaming media servers. As a result, Akamai should be able to pass that cost savings on to customers to encourage them to use the new service . But without knowing how they will charge for the offering, that remains to be seen. Akamai also stated that this new service is primarily directed towards major content owners and broadcasters with long form content and is not expected to appeal to the masses just yet.

In addition to the new service, Akamai is also working with Microsoft to make the HD workflow easier for content creators by enabling them to encode and ingest their video directly to Akamai from Microsoft’s Expression Studio Encoder. This new functionality of the Expression Studio Encoder 2 SP1, will be ready early 2009 and will enable direct publishing to the Akamai network from within the encoder.

While the service sounds like it has the potential to provide better quality video, there is still no proof, that I have seen, that HD quality video allows for “greater engagement” and “improved monetization opportunities” like the press release states. While many in the industry want to say that HD quality video means viewers will watch content for longer periods of time, it also means that it costs more to deliver those bits. As viewers watch more content, at higher bitrates, the costs go up, not down. Until someone comes forward with a real example showing how a content owner delivered more ads in an HD stream, due to longer viewing times and as a result offset the additional cost required to deliver all the extra bits, it’s all speculation. And if someone views a video for an extra 10 or 15 minutes longer, how exactly does that enable more monetization when most long-form videos don’t even do in-stream ads? Most ads are still pre or post roll.

As an industry it sounds nice to say HD quality video means longer viewing times and more monetization, but the fact so few content owners are doing anything in HD, really says the opposite. If this new service from Akamai, using Microsoft’s smooth streaming technology, can greatly reduce the cost to deliver HD quality video, then it has a shot. But until we know the pricing model for the new service, it’s going to be hard to guess what impact it can have on the market anytime soon.

NFL Offers HD, Full-Screen Streaming, But Only Outside The U.S.

Nfl
After my post last week entitled "NFL's Live Streaming Leaves A Lot To Be Desired: Capping Users, Poor Video Quality", someone wrote into me to point out that the NFL already has a HD full-screen video streaming service called Game Pass HD, a subscription based offering that is only available to users outside the U.S. and Canada.

Game Pass HD offers all of the functionality and quality that I would expect the NFL would want to offer for their Sunday Night Football Extra offering, especially since they are quoted in so many places as saying that the "user experience" is what's most important to them. The Game Pass service has excellent video quality, in what looks to be up to a 2MB stream using Move Networks and allows for full-screen mode. You can see a demo of the service on the NFL's website here.

While I don't know exactly why the NFL would offer one video stream in better quality than another, you have to wonder if this is another example of content owners not putting their content in HD due to the added costs of distributing HD quality video. For those paying for the stream, higher quality is offered. But for the free stream, why deliver HD quality when the content is not being monetized? That's the debate the industry should be discussing instead of focusing on the technology of HD.

I know that some will say that HD quality means longer engagement periods which then provides the ability to deliver more ads or branding, but at what cost? I have yet to see anyone provide a breakdown on how many additional ads can be delivered in an HD stream and how that offsets the additional bandwidth costs associated with HD video delivery. If all it takes to deliver more ads and generate more revenue is an HD quality stream, then every content owner would be encoding their content in higher bitrates or in HD quality. Yet so far, HD quality video on the web is still not the norm and in my mind, this still all comes down to cost. Delivering HD quality video is still too expensive for the majority of content owners when their content is not generating any revenue.

Not All “HTTP Streaming” Is Created Equal, Nor Is It Always Actually Streaming

Tim Siglin has an excellent article over on StreamingMedia.com today that explains the differences between delivering video via HTTP from a web server and delivering video via HTTP from a streaming server. And he's dead on accurate when he writes how confusing it can be for content owners when CDNs use the term "streaming" to define video delivered via HTTP. In most cases, I think some CDNs are trying to say that their HTTP delivery services can mimic some of the functionality that streaming provides, but they do a poor job of explaining the differences to the customer. Tim's article gives a clear explanation of the differences between the two and how it relates to the Windows Media and Flash platforms.

Layoffs Not Affecting All Vendors: CDNs Have Over 200 Open Positions

While some vendors related to the online video industry have started reducing their headcount and laying off part of their staff, vendors in the content delivery industry are still hiring like mad. A quick look at their website’s shows more than 200 open positions amongst the bunch. These openings are no surprise considering how much money the vast majority of the delivery networks have raised and the rate at which they are trying to expand. So if you are looking for a new job in the CDN space, hit up the links below. Not on the list? Send me the link to your open jobs and I’ll add them.

Akamai, 58 openings:
http://www.akamai.com/html/careers/current_openings.html

Limelight Networks, 14 openings:
http://www.jobing.com/cc/limelight-networks120

CDNetworks, 1 opening:
http://www.us.cdnetworks.com/about/careers.php

BitGravity, 25 openings:
http://bitgravity.com/about/careers/

Highwinds, 5 openings:
http://highwinds.com/careers.html

AudioVideoWeb.com, 2 openings:
http://www.audiovideoweb.com/employee_op.html

Mirror Image, 2 openings:
http://www.mirror-image.com/site/company/Careers/tabid/89/Default.aspx

Level 3, has lots of openings and at least 12 related to video:
https://recruiting.level3.com/ENG/Candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=JobList&szFormat=search

EdgeCast, 4 openings:
http://www.edgecast.com/cdn_careers.htm

Streaming Media Hosting, 3 openings:
http://www.streamingmediahosting.com/careers.htm

EdgeStream, 1 opening:
http://www.edgestream.com/about_careers.html

Move Networks, 12 openings:
http://www.movenetworks.com/company/careers

Digital Fountain, 7 openings:
http://www.digitalfountain.com/careers.html

Internap, 15 openings:
https://jobs-internap.icims.com/jobs/search?ss=1&searchLocation=&searchCategory=

Panther Express, 4 openings:
http://pantherexpress.com/careers/

Pando Networks, 1 opening:
http://pandonetworks.com/jobs

Velocix, 5 openings:
http://velocix.com/aboutus_careers.php

Voxel.net, 5 openings:
http://voxel.net/about/jobs

AT&T, tons of openings and at least 12 related to video:
http://www.att.com/gen/careers?pid=10631#

Vusion, 4 openings:
http://vusion.com/company/jobs/

BitTorrent, 1 opening:
http://www.bittorrent.com/company/jobs/

Amazon, at least 4 jobs related to AWS:
http://www.amazon.com/Careers-University-Recruiting/b?ie=UTF8&node=203348011

Grid Networks, 1 opening:
http://gridnetworks.com/about/careers

NFL’s Live Streaming Leaves A Lot To Be Desired: Capping Users, Poor Video Quality

When the NFL announced it would be streaming seventeen games this year on NFL.com and NBCSports.com, dubbed "Sunday Night Football Extra", many were excited to see what kind of video offering the NFL had in store for their fans. With the NFL having now completed nearly half of their broadcasts, the user experience has been anything less than what I would call a quality offering for a variety of reasons.

Nfl
For starters, I can't figure out why the NFL puts people into a waiting room? In a conversation with the NFL yesterday, they explained that in order to provide the best user experience, they are limiting the number of users who can watch the game at the same time. They also commented that since the wait time is usually very short, I waited between 3-5 minutes this past Sunday, it's not that big of a deal. But the question is, why cap the number of people at all? Through the first four broadcasts, each NFL game averaged around 125,000 total unique viewers online. That averages out to about 50,000 simultaneous users online at any given time. Considering the NFL is streaming the games between two content delivery networks (CDN), Limelight and Akamai, why the limitation? Akamai and Limelight combined can clearly support way more than fifty thousand streams and capping users is not providing any better experience for those who are already watching. Is the NFL simply trying to reduce their cost to broadcast the games, by capping users and keeping their bandwidth bill lower? To me, the rational for capping users just doesn't make sense.

In addition to the strange capping policy, the video feed is also being encoded using less than optimal settings that reduce the quality, not improve it. The NFL confirmed that the encoding is a multi-bitrate file, up to 980Kbps and I have confirmed from others it is being done in H.264. No problem with the H.264 part, but why is the video letterboxed? They are simply wasting bandwidth and video quality with the black bars at the top and bottom of the video window. And if you remove those bars, the aspect ratio of the video window is 490×280. The average aspect ration for a video that is being encoded up to 980Kbps would be 640×480. So why is the NFL not converting the broadcast signal correctly before encoding and why is the window size so small for such a high-quality bitrate? They should be taking the anamorphic feed and stretching it back to the 16:9
ratio and cropping out the black in the encoder to not waste bandwidth.

In addition, as many bloggers have stated before, why is there no full-screen option? For a 980Kbps feed, you could get some fairly decent full screen video quality. But even at the window size they stick to, the video quality for me last weekend was poor. I could not read the numbers on the bottom of the video screen that gave the score and there was way too much pixelation. And being on a 20Mbps FiOS connection and a new MacBook Pro, my connection and computer were not the problem.

As some have pointed out previously, switching between camera angles is a pain as you have to watch a video ad before it switches. So if you want to switch angles in the middle of a play, then you are out of luck on seeing how the play ends. What incentive is there for users to then switch between all of the angles? Why have the different angles as an option if you are going to make switching between them such a bad user experience?

I know that from day one, the NFL has clearly stated that this online video offering is an "experiment" to test the idea of potentially bringing more games online down the road. But even as an experiment, you would think the NFL would want to provide the best quality user experience possible? All they keep saying is that the steps they have taken, like the capping, is to increase the "user experience", yet it's doing the exact opposite. What do you think of the NFL's streaming experience to date?

Call For Speakers Now Open For Streaming Media East 09

Smeast_logo
The call for speakers for the Streaming Media East show, taking place May 12-13th 2009, at the Hilton Hotel in NYC, is now open. The deadline to submit is December 1st and all speaking requests must be submitted via the online form at: www.streamingmedia.com/east/speakerinfo.asp

I cannot stress enough how important it is to get your submission in on time. Last year, we had over 800 speaking submissions and 110 actual speaking spots. If you are interested in possibly moderating or organizing a session of your own, please contact me immediately.