Origin Perspectives

Achieve More in Less Time

2011-10-18T07:16:00.000-07:00

In a society driven by advances in technology and the ever-increasing demands of consumers, many individuals have adopted the idea that “time is money”. This mindset brought us to live in an age where information is readily available at our fingertips. The days of spending long agonizing hours in libraries doing research are long over. Today, a student can get through their entire university career without so much as opening anything other than their laptop. As a university student I have experienced this shift firsthand as many of my classes are now available in an online format where video lectures, discussion boards, and an online portal now replace traditional brick and mortar classrooms. It is increasingly apparent that instant on-demand access touches every aspect of our lives. From textbooks and bank accounts to our favorite TV shows, you can access nearly anything you want any time you want it. Generation Y, imbued with the value of time and the luxury of having virtually anything on-demand, has quickly become a driving force behind online video.

Twenty years ago consumers would crowd around the TV to catch their favorite TV shows or the hottest new movie. They would have to reorganize and plan their lives around a schedule set by their local TV stations.

The world has changed with convenience being a commodity in today’s reality. If a program or film is not readily available to consumers when they want it, they’ll search for it elsewhere. This is evidence of the tremendous horizontal extension that has developed through constant advances in technology and online media. In short, the world is growing smaller. We now expect to be able to conveniently access, manage, and even upload media via our computers. This is why it is important for industry leaders, such as Origin Digital, to continue to pursue faster, more consumer-accommodating ways to get online video to the masses.

Author: Brittany Lorincz, Marketing Intern

The Future of UX as We Know It

2011-09-22T11:09:00.000-07:00

There is a lot of discussion about the future of User Experience (UX) design among fellow practitioners. UX design, as an evolution from User Interaction design, Human Computer Interaction, Human Factors/Ergonomics, Usability Engineer, etc., has developed in parallel with computing and technology in our daily lives; a change that will continue as technology becomes ever more ubiquitous in our environment. However, this is not an attempt to further the discussion of the future of the UX practitioner, but it is my intention to explore how the rest of the business world currently views UX as well as how I view their understanding of the field, which will hopefully mature in the near future.

Currently, the biggest issue with the field of UX is the blank stare that follows when you tell someone you are a User Experience designer. It is usually followed with a “Huh?”, which then needs to be addressed with a crafted elevator pitch. The pitch explains how the UX role “is responsible for designing not just the layout of an interface, but also understanding the humanistic approach a user takes during their interaction with the software in order to appropriately accomplish a desired task.”

Imagine the design of an ATM at the bank. UX design is not just about the placement of buttons on the machine, but it is also about creating a machine that accommodates the withdrawal of ‘fast cash’ amounts. If the ATM was designed around a ‘fast transfer’ between accounts then the ATM wouldn’t work for the average person looking to grab some cash & be on their merry way.

As UX grows and more products are built with a specific focus, not only on getting the design right but also on getting the right design, there will be less blank stares and misconceptions about UX being a combination of a visual designer and a front end programmer. Although a new field, people will soon understand the value of UX design, both for individual products as well as for a company’s entire brand.

Author: CJ Page, User Experience Expert

The Future Horizon of Digital Media

2011-08-11T08:41:00.000-07:00

With video consumption at an all-time high, there's been an increased interest in the long-running debate of TV versus PC. Given the availability of bandwidth as well as the option for online distribution services such as Roku and Boxee, we are finding how easy it is to transition online video to becoming the traditional home entertainment system. Couple this with the rising cost of cable and satellite TV services, nowadays many consumers are indeed moving away from their traditional TV service. For those of you who are new to this trend, the convergence of the TV and Internet is not only about receiving TV programming on your computer, but also about bringing the web to your TV.

One major barometer for determining the future of this industry is by trending where companies are spending their ad dollars. Over the past 10 years, there’s been a shift in how marketers sell their products to consumers via the Internet. As technology improves, marketers will continue to target their audiences in a finite fashion; something they were never able do in the past using traditional TV programming. Some cable providers have tried to curb this trend by raising internet service pricing, which is still nowhere near as costly as cable TV. However, with so many options, internet service providers are riding a fine line in pricing themselves out of the market, allowing us to avoid paying sky high fees for internet services that mirror cable TV.

As the Internet pushes to keep up with the consumer, the residential experience and online video will start to be seen as the norm as the switch is to your television set today. Prepare yourself…

\
Author: Ray Bridgelall, Solutions Architect

To Oversee or Go Overseas

2011-07-05T11:41:00.000-07:00

As a project manager at Origin Digital, I’ve been fortunate enough to work with new technologies ranging from live event streaming and player development to Content Management System (CMS) deployments. Given my customer-facing role, I’m able to deal with various facets of the business and connect such insight to the demands of today’s market.. My dealings with separate sides of the business spectrum gives me a complete view of the entire end-to-end production process, allows me to identify potential pitfalls as well as opportunities for the client.

I believe organizations preparing for their future in IP broadcast should look to its employees in order to differentiate themselves from market competitors. Rather than strictly focus on tech upgrades, companies involved in the IP space should utilize new ideas from its employee base. Leveraging original concepts from internal resources can possibly lead to innovative ways to use technology already in place.

While certain technical upgrades are necessary to stay relevant, such upgrades can only provide a temporary edge as rivals will eventually advance their capabilities to match yours which brings me to my point - use employee intel in order to assist in how you "productize" your company’s services. For instance, HD encoding as a service is considered standard for many online content providers making it increasingly difficult for service providers to differentiate themselves from their competitors. If they were to, however, promote their intellectual services along with their technical capabilities, it would showcase a much more premium service, which ultimately can only exist within one organization.

As the digital media industry leaves its nascent phase and settles into a real ROI-driven business model, companies should look to its internal community to better understand how the common user views the online world. Who could be a better use case than your own employees who strive for nothing but the best and make data analysis part of their professional daily life?

Take Origin Digital for example. Here we’ve increased the production of measurement and analytical tools for specific verticals and customers and directly improved user experiences for different users. After we gather the data, our next step is to create methods to review and cross reference what we learned from various users to better understand how specific users interacted with the application in use.

A model such as the one explained above provides content providers, service providers, and end-users with several benefits. Content providers are provided with flexible technical service provisioning and at the same time service providers can quickly add clients to the its platform to support a full gamut of needs at little to no cost to their business omitting costly custom development work for each and every client. In the end, the user never misses a beat and is provided with a better experience each time as the service provider continues to analyze each online interaction. All three parties win with this model.

Author: Haywood Batchelor, Project Manager

I am Dissatisfied. I want my money back!

2011-02-21T12:04:00.001-08:00

While companies like Amazon (AMZN) and Netflix (NFLX) are winning over web consumers, the majority of us are lagging behind. A recent e-commerce report from Foresee Results on the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ASCI) indicated that in 2010, overall e-commerce satisfaction sank to its lowest point since 2004. What does this all mean?

According to the report, e-commerce satisfaction was down 2.6 percent compared to last year. In large part, companies show decent profits but have large declines in satisfaction. The online retailer, Amazon, is dominating given their variety, selection of merchandise, and price. According to the report, Netflix’s shift in business strategy (to streaming movies) is paying off. Their strong satisfaction scores illustrate that they adapt well to new opportunities without letting their customer service suffer.

Although not a complete indicator, this report shows that a drop in e-tail scores were led by smaller retailers, who are unable to keep up with larger companies like AMZN and NFLX. This report also revealed the future of mobile—the report indicated that online brokerage services came in higher (than retail or travel) at 81 percent. Why you might ask? The results suggested that online brokerage users were extremely satisfied with the mobile interfaces of popular services because these portals addressed the users’ needs for real-time stock prices.

All of the above point to one obvious conclusion: companies must improve their products; make them usable and relevant for consumers. Wait, this kind of makes sense, but what does this have to do with online video?

Last week, Apple and Google announced their respective models for publishing video content to the web. Although it’s too early to respond to this announcement , fair to say that both Apple and Google are the front-runners (e.g. like Amazon and Netflix in retail) for publishing/monetizing content. If my assumption turns out to be true, the challenges that smaller companies face in keeping up with revenues and maintaining happy customers will be steep.

The variables that make up a successful video monetization strategy are still unknown for the entire spectrum of content owners. There may not be a clear-cut answer or approach, but I am a strong believer in the following:

• Companies must be able to differentiate their product, or be able to
offer a product that is standard but easily customizable
• User experience for the end-user is critical
• Customer Service is just as important

Content owners and publishers must understand that before implementing a rock-solid monetization strategy that they must produce high quality content. At some point, however, companies will need to be aware of where they stand in order to remain competitive within their respective industries.

Author: Audric Kim, Product Manager

Dozens of options and I still can’t watch what I want, when I want it…bah humbug!

2010-12-20T13:06:00.000-08:00

Video technology has progressed rapidly over the last five years to the point where you can literally watch Internet streamed video on your TV set. There’s no longer any excuse for not watching what you want, when you want it, where you want it. But now that the hard part has been figured out, we find that the world of content owners has not kept pace.

I’m not a video snob; I only recently upgraded my 20”CRT Toshiba which served me well for almost a decade (we kept the 13” VHS combo). I’ve engaged in major atrocities when it comes to viewing content on unsuitable devices – like seeing Avatar for the first time on my iTouch (bad choice). But for me, it is all about easy access/convenience vs. quality, which is why I don’t watch TV on a schedule and it doesn’t have to be perfect – just “good enough”. I don’t have a DVR, nor do I want to pay for a capability that I feel should be provided anyways, even if it means pixilation here and there and the same amount of ads as the original airing.

Every time my wife wants to watch one of her reality shows I’m reminded how painful it is to view something off schedule. First, she has to see if it is playing on regular television, then checks FIOS on-demand which typically lags on the newer episodes or doesn’t have particular shows, and finally she’ll check out the network’s site (VH1, E!, Bravo, etc.) or even Hulu/Fancast. If all else fails, she goes to iTunes and pays almost as much as a movie rental to view the content once. I thought the latter was a total waste of money until I tried to locate and watch the final episode of AMC’s The Walking Dead which was unavailable anywhere online (at least legally) and FIOS on-demand didn’t have #6 on VOD. Grudgingly, I paid the $2.99 and got my post apocalyptic zombie fix on a 14” MacBook instead of my new 46” LCD-LED Samsung. I was equally frustrated when trying to re-rent the original Iron Man (which I also saw on my iTouch) after seeing Iron Man 2; not in iTunes (even though it was previously), not on Amazon, not on Netflix Streaming, etc, etc.

I’m not the first person to complain about rights and won’t be the last, but this is the single biggest roadblock preventing me from reaching couch potato nirvana. I was hoping Google TV would be my savior because it would at least allow me to watch my favorites online via my television but alas everything worth seeing has been blocked until Google coughs up and the Logitech Revue pricing gets in line with other set top box offerings. So this weekend, I finally caved and connected my MacBook to my television and used the hack setup to indulge in the best solution available today. Not happy about it because it is a pain, with wires hanging everywhere and the need to go out and buy a wireless keyboard. This setup is not as hard as it used to be, with most modern TVs providing DVI/VGA ports, so why is it the only way to get the most content on demand on your TV? The answer might just be because we need an ‘Internet based’ cable company which I will still pay $70/month to, but at least then I’d be able to watch anything I want, when I want it.

Although this fracturing is great for people in my business, it reminds me why I don’t watch much TV anymore and just stick to movie rentals. As I work with publishers both large and small, I try to keep this holy grail of on-demand consumption in mind as we develop next gen solutions for getting their content to new over-the-top mediums as quickly as possible.

Author: Forest Johns, VP of Solutions Engineering

Google: The mastermind on the web or straight out greedy?

2010-11-23T15:16:00.000-08:00

To most people Google is the go-to search engine with a familiar white background and the occasional holiday-appropriate graphic change. What many may not know, however, is how Google transitioned from a simple web search engine with “contextual” paid listing (a.k.a. AdSense) to a successful explorer of new spaces, including smart phones, tablets, television, operating systems, cloud computing, cars that drive themselves, gaming and the list goes on.

After doing some (ahem) Googling on the company’s history and roots in online video and display advertising, I began to realize the financial promise of Google and its effect on the online video industry as we know it. It’s no surprise that Google, with its acquisitions of YouTube and DoubleClick, has blossomed into a much bigger video-centric platform as a result of increasing competition, including from the ever-growing mobile industry. Furthermore, as smart phones continue to gain traction with consumers, Google’s convenience and accessibility can be enjoyed on a much broader scale by anyone with internet capabilities on their phones (a number that is undoubtedly growing by the day).

Being the devil’s advocate that I am, it would be wrong for me to go without mentioning Apple and to a lesser degree Microsoft as two aggressive competitors in the digital media space. However, Google’s mobile advantage (being its Android operating system (OS)), has raised the stakes for all Internet connected devices. Google’s segue into the smart phone and the much anticipated tablet industry adds another avenue for them to collect usage data and make it available to advertisers. Once Google enhances its design and usability, a feature Apple is most commended for, it will have the full package in the mobile space.

As Google continues to unify the whole multimedia experience, it has now set its sights on the television industry, launching Google TV this month. Google TV, comprised of an Internet connected television (or device for an existing TV), delivers your existing television providers content seamlessly integrated with a layer of web goodness from online sites (although this list is getting shorter by the day as providers block their web content) and,early next year, apps from the Market. However, in the background, Google is silently capturing information about what you are watching, your viewing behavior, when and if you stopped watching XYZ show, and even the sites you visited while viewing regular television on cable (picture-in-picture style). A pretty powerful piece of analytics gathering equipment, I’d say.

Google’s main competitors in the living room - Apple and Microsoft- may present some future challenges, but there is something to be said about being the first online system to completely change the face of the Web, literally and metaphorically. Others have put stuff ‘on’ your TV, but Google has made the Internet and everything else ‘part’ of the TV. With Google continually offering mind-bending new products and initiatives, mostly for free, it makes one wonder: What will Google do next and how will it affect content owners and aggregators?

Author: Nicole Figueiredo, Marketing Manager

Is the Online World Shrinking or Expanding?

2010-10-20T09:30:00.000-07:00

We have all heard the adage that, because of technology, we live in an increasingly “shrinking world”, and this is, in many ways, unquestionably true. However, as Origin Digital’s service footprint expands globally, we continually encounter opportunities and market dynamics which challenge us to “stretch” in order to address what seems like a wildly expanding world - of media consumption preferences, of contribution and distribution channels, of devices (handsets, STBs, Connected TVs). Perhaps the most interesting growth is around consumer expectations of immediacy, quality – and timing for new services.

This is not a new topic, and we have been hearing for a number of years now how, as broadband delivery networks increase capacity and ubiquitous service coverage, and as the compression and streaming technologies improve, that IP content alternatives will directly compete with Television. Origin Digital was founded on that belief – and we have, like many industry pundits, been watching and preparing for the legendary “inflection point”. While it’s probably not realistic to claim that we are there yet – at least not globally (many markets we classify as “emerging” are still months or years away from deploying infrastructure that will make this feasible) – there are geographies and initiatives today which support the view that the critical time in this evolution is now . . . right now. And if - as a content originator, aggregator, or network operator - you haven’t matured the strategy, partnerships and technology to accelerate your IP broadcast offering, you may already be in danger of watching your market advantage go right “Over The Top”, to less conservative competitors (some of whom you may not even know exist).

As part of the Accenture corporate family, Origin Digital gets a broad and intimate view of leading edge movers in the IP Broadcast space, in their various shapes in just about every corner of the globe (“emerging” or “advanced”) – and this has helped to shape its approach to both technology and regional engagement. Here are two key “global marketplace” observations that drive Origin Digital’s aggressive agenda:

There is no more indulgent forgiveness.
Even as recently as a couple of years ago, consumers were so smitten with the novelty of viewing video on their computers and mobile devices that they were (despite constant grumbling) willing to deal with the “glitches” – video that took forever to load, low quality video (and low quality content), and any number of random imperfections that interrupted viewing. Today it’s a different story. Consumers are paying for premium content, the leading edge service providers have proven that an excellent experience is possible across a range of devices, and as the television begins to reclaim its rightful place with broadband viewers, “broadcast rigor” and reliability are no longer optional.

This is, as OD’s John Leland (VP of Global Media Operations) frequently says,“…the Big Time Ladies and Gentlemen…” and the smart content and network companies are selecting partners who understand that, and live by it.

You need to be in the market if you want to lead in the market.
As a strategic partner of many of the world’s leading CDNs, OD has consistently been at the front of the pack promoting new global delivery models, virtual or “cloud” service components, and other technologies that enable flexible deployment and high quality consumption experiences across geographies. Additionally, OD has worked with many of its top customers to import and export premium content on a virtualized, managed services model. This continues to be an efficient and smart way of doing business. Nonetheless, however much of the world may be shrinking; there remains significant gaps between and across various key markets – which can only be addressed by having a dedicated and informed team “on the ground”.

Today, a huge part of Origin Digital’s value proposition is the ability to deliver clients across the world the combination of Accenture’s deep understanding of their industries, their cultures, and, most importantly, their specific aspirations and business challenges. Accenture Consulting and Origin Digital’s Services – it’s a “one-two punch” that is taking our business to an entirely different level. It’s no coincidence that today Origin Digital is more active internationally than ever before – and this will only increase. When OD’s customers are striving to become market leaders as providers of IP Media experiences, it means making significant investments and often requires moving ahead of the pack. This means risk – and when there is significant risk, you want serious partners. One dimensional technology companies need not apply – and those without “in market” presence and expertise need not even inquire.

So, is the world “shrinking” or “expanding”? Paradoxically, it seems to be doing both . . . very quickly. Most importantly, if you’re in the content or network business, and you haven’t laid a strategic foundation, forged your critical partnerships, committed against an investment as well as set your “IP broadcast” plan in motion then, well, sooner would definitely be better than later.

Author: Curt Kendall, VP of Business Development

The Past and Present of Online Video

2010-08-19T08:14:00.000-07:00

Streaming of media to home users has been around for over 15 years. RealNetworks was arguably the first company to broadly infiltrate the consumer market with streaming audio and video back in 1994. Since then, a number of different flavors of video are now utilized to deliver video to consumers and because households are often equipped with high speed internet connections, the experience of watching content on your computer begins to rival that of traditional television.

For most of the history of streaming video, content creators have had to incorporate a plan to distribute their content to home computers. For many years, the options to do so were simplified by the nature of the consumer’s device to view online video; desktops and laptops. At the beginning, you would install the Real plugin to be able to view most streaming media. Adobe claimed a 98% market penetration, an easy initial install of their plugin, and everyone who visited Flash based “rich media” sites was thus enabled to consume video wrapped in Flash. Other formats popped up offering differing quality and functionality. While providing an online video experience called for particular levels of effort by the content creators, the limited options for home viewers to ingest the video experience kept streaming media logistics in check.

Today’s smart phones, set top boxes and internet connected televisions have created a major wrinkle to streaming media logistics. What was once a simple conversion from baseband video (traditional television) to something deliverable and playable on a desktop or laptop has mutated to an evolving landscape of devices of which the public is beginning to expect the same media experience on. Instead of a content creator repurposing their video to one alternate (internet ready) format, they are now considering ten copies of the same video and beyond. While the personal computer market has been dominated by two operating systems and is serviceable by a single IP based delivery, mobile handsets have varying operating systems, screen resolutions, aspect ratios and codec support.

Content creators who are able to monetize their content have an easier time stomaching the costs to make their content ubiquitous to the end user device. If you charge for access to your content through a Pay-Per-View model, it is easier to justify these costs. Content creators who are offering their content for free, (even with ad support) may have difficulty accepting today’s costs associated with a large transcoding effort. Unfortunately, consumers don’t care much about these costs, yet still have high expectations of quality.

The landscape is not getting any less cloudy despite efforts to promote simplicity. HTML5 is the current buzz in the industry, but most media creators have popularized it and limited their use of it to Apple’s iPad. The use of HTML5 in and on other devices requires multiple flavors of the same video if you want all devices that support HTML5 to be able to play it back. If you factor in different screen sizes of devices, and different connection speeds (2G, 3G, 4G, Wifi), the number of “copies” of the same video can grow to an eye-popping number.The development of Scalable Video Coding is something to keep a close eye out for. Device support for this flavor of h.264 video could help to bring the number of necessary copies of an individual piece of media down to something more economically palatable.

The consumer cares little about the level of effort involved with providing a “watch video anywhere” experience. How will you be able to meet their high expectations and monetize your content while keeping your costs down?

Author: Mike Dube, Solutions Engineer

Is Flash dead?

2010-07-07T07:46:00.000-07:00

There has been a lot of commotion on the Internet since the announcement of the iPhone/iPad not supporting Flash. This has created a veritable panic on the Internet as most people see this as a sign that the popular multimedia format is on the decline.

But, with all things Apple, there is always an ulterior motive. Fancy animation effects aside, Flash is the dominant video delivery format on the Internet. Without the ubiquity and ease of installation of the plug-in to enable easy video playback in a brower, it is unlikely that Internet video stars like YouTube would have reached critical mass.

As an alternative, Apple has suggested HTML5, which is an open standard that includes a number of new APIs that allow you to interact with the browser in a more application-like way. One of these new APIs is a video element tag that can play a video in the browser with a single line of HTML code:

<video src="videoURL" />

Seems simple enough, and in the last few months many of our customers have approached us about creating a replacement Flash player for them using HTML5. However, with HTML5 you are plunged back into the browser wars of the 1990’s, where web developers had to test their websites in multiple browsers and versions (Internet Explorer, Netscape, Safari) in an effort to minimize the different behaviors for standard tags. This image sums it up really well, showing the fractured support for HTML5 features across all popular browsers, with the worst culprit being, as usual, Microsoft Internet Explorer. Even within the simple ‘video’ tag, there are differences. All will support the MPEG4 format, some will support the OGG video format, and probably only Chrome will support the recently donated VP8 codec.

One fact that is little discussed on the topic is that only Apple Safari will support live streaming using their open HLS standard which also works on iPhone/iPad. This is a major show stopper for any customer that provides a mixture of live and on demand content, and will require you to have a Flash or Silverlight player around for live event delivery. Adaptive bit rates? … only supported by Safari. The other major disadvantage is that players now days don’t just play video. They are full-fledged applications that authenticate users, secure content, navigate playlists, search and recommended content, display advertisements, and submit analytics data. To fully move to HTML5, each one of these major functions will need to be developed in AJAX/JavaScript. The downside with JavaScript is that the code is visible, meaning that calls to backend systems will be exposed, and implementing security, including DRM, will be harder.

In summary, Apple’s ban and HTML5 is not the silver bullet that will kill Flash. For the moment, it is actually making things harder for content owners to get their content out to all platforms using a single format, and if you want to stream live video to more than just Apple products, you will need to use Flash or Silverlight.

Author, Forest Johns, VP of Solution Engineering

To App or not to App

2010-05-18T15:03:00.000-07:00

As companies start to wade their way into the mobile landscape, the first thing that they normally request is if they should build an “app” to distribute their video content to smart phones. This is in part due to the endless Apple iPhone commercials that burn the phrase, “There’s an app for that”, into your minds. However, creating a specific application for a particular phone(s) may not always be the best solution. In addition to creating a branded application, there are two other options that may be better suited depending on the nature of the business problem that needs to be solved. The options are as follows:

Application
An application is a compiled piece of code that runs on a specific smart phone, or a family of handsets. Each phone grouping (iPhone, Android, Blackberry, Winmobile, Symbian) has its own OS, and a different way of creating, running, and distributing applications. For example, an iPhone application is written in Objective-C and is distributed via the App Store. An Android and Blackberry application is written in Java, and is distributed via their proprietary markets. Windows Mobile requires a C# application and has a similar marketplace. Although for some phones users can directly load applications, the stores/markets are really the only mainstream option and have the advantage of providing updates. Media such as images and videos can be embedded into the application directly into the application.

Pros: Branded user experience, can operate without network connection, fewer compatibility issues with different models within same OS family, more UI options, can provide video playback support
Cons: Users have to specifically search for and install application, unique application needs to be built for each phone OS with little overlap, updates require a new release, including video in the application increases size

Optimized Website/Portal
An optimized website displays itself within the native browser of the phone, just like any other website. Most smart phones now have very sophisticated browsers and can view most web sites if they stick to HTML, CSS and JavaScript (no Flash/Silverlight). Web site developers still have to take into consideration what type of phone is viewing the page, and will utilize handset detection to determine the appropriate sizing and video formats that will work for each of the models.

Pros: Instant updates, build once for all phone OS with small adjustment for different phones, no installation required
Cons: Requires a network connection, somewhat limited UI options, handset detection can be extremely difficult and time consuming to maintain, relies on native video player of phone OS

Hybrid
The hybrid method is a combination of the two previous methods and utilizes an installed application that pulls some or all of its content from the Internet. For example, Bank of America’s Android app is distributed and installed through the market, but when run, it simply pulls up an optimized web portal within the application. Another example of a hybrid is an application that pulls larger media files from the network, for example videos off a CDN, when the user requests them.

Pros: Only small amount of OS dependant development and fewer releases required, reduced application file sizes, can still brand the experience
Cons: Requires a network connection, some level of handset detection still required

Creating and maintaining applications for multiple phones types can be a real handful as you will seldom find a single resource aside from an agency that can create all variants. This is why in most cases, the hybrid or web site approach is the best fit for most business needs, particularly for situations where the content itself is pulled from an external source or needs to be updated frequently.

Author, Forest Johns,VP of Solution Engineering

Happenings at Mobile World Congress 2010

2010-03-12T10:06:00.000-08:00

Origin Digital recently had the opportunity to share its technology and solution sets with a broad assortment of international players in the mobile services market. As an exhibitor and workshop presenter within the Accenture Pavillion at the Mobile World Congress (MWC) in Barcelona, Origin shared not only its advanced IP broadcast management solutions and player frameworks, but also its broader strategy for accelerating the consumption of video on mobile devices - while protecting carrier networks from network burden due to backhaul, and performance issues related to congested Internet gateways.

With more and more mobile users accessing both live and on-demand video content on any number of rich content enabled devices – led mostly by Apple’s iPhone – carrier networks are getting bombarded with traffic that their data networks were really not designed to handle. To understand this, consider that an hour of typical web browsing on a mobile phone consumes about 40 megabytes of data, while an hour spent watching fuzzy YouTube videos will consume upwards of 180 megabytes, and a live event, like a match or concert, might consume up to 300 megabytes or more.

The cumulative effect of proliferating devices and growing video consumption habits among mobile users is a “cratering” of carrier networks – which impacts all data services for all users, and commonly contributes to what is still perceived as an inferior viewing experience. It doesn’t help matters that for the vast majority of content being consumed, the carriers have no revenue stake – and with the popularity of unlimited data plans, this just adds up mounting cost, as carriers are forced to contemplate massive network upgrades, just to be competitive. Most major networks are feeling this pain, and many of them are publicly crying “uncle”.

Origin Digital has partnered with the global leader in CDN services, Akamai Technologies, to create a unique offering which both reduces the burden on the carrier networks caused by consumption of popular content and also creates a mechanism for “plugging in” content partners to create high quality experiences which result in revenue. The solution combines what is called a Private Content Delivery Network (or PCDN) with Content Acceleration Services. It works like this:

Working with Accenture technical and business consulting teams, the carriers frame up their goals and projections around the use of video on their networks – now and going forward. Then, the Akamai technologists create a plan for embedding their global caching servers within the carrier networks – as dedicated nodes to handle the carrier traffic. Finally, Origin Digital acts as the “on-ramp” for partner content which is acquired, managed, encoded and delivered directly to the cache points within the carrier network. The combination of services can have dramatic results:

1. The carrier will instantly experience relief across its network and will lighten the reliance on Internet gateways, because popular content requests don’t have to travel repeatedly from the tower out to the source on the public Internet. After the initial retrieval, the content can be pulled from the cache which can be located proximally to the towers at the aggregation points.

2. The carriers can now begin to engage partners for subscription or possibly ad supported content onto their network, because Origin Digital can capture and process the content – and deliver directly onto the cache points.

3. Because both Origin Digital (on the processing end) and Akamai HD Network technology (on the delivery side) both support smooth streaming, delivery from the cache to the tower and out to the user is automatically optimized depending on the available bandwidth on the network and also the quality of the user’s connection. So, all users receive the best video stream their connectivity can afford them. This creates a big leap in the quality of the experience – which can’t be overestimated in an industry where subscriber churn profoundly affects the bottom line.

Not surprisingly, there was a high degree of interest in this among the mobile carriers which Origin Digital had the opportunity to speak with – and it looks like the coming weeks will be very active as these discussions progress.

Author - Curt Kendall, VP of Business Development

The Coming of Age for Mobile Video

2010-01-28T15:04:00.000-08:00

To be published in the SHOW DAILY publication

The continuing technology evolution continues to revolutionize the mobile phone industry with powerful processors, fast Internet, high resolution screens, and thousands of applications. Mobile devices, which traditionally have served a singular purpose, have evolved beyond “dial tone”. With the introduction of new “smart” devices such as the Apple iPhone®, Windows Mobile®, BlackBerry® and Google Android™, mobile devices have become multimedia platforms that now deliver “videotone.”

Cisco estimates that mobile data traffic will double every year through 2013, increasing 66 times between 2009 and 2013 and by 2013, 64 percent of the world’s mobile traffic will be from video (Source). Additionally, thanks to applications like YouTube®, iTunes® and the availability of 3G connectivity, high quality video on your handset is a reality.

This land of mobile promise is a long time promise but only a recent occurrence; smart phone capabilities have made dramatic strides in the last few years, most notably with the introduction of the iPhone. However, the dramatic rise of 3G-enabled phones and data-hungry users have caught wireless providers off guard, and it is negatively impacting not only the users’ experience, but also their perception of the overall service.

Few expected the massive increase in data usage; 3G networks were deployed with the idea that access over the Internet would be limited, compared to desktop and laptop computers. Pipes were relatively small and devices relatively simple. The original thinking was that phones would be used to access WAP-optimized web sites, corporate email, “walled content” gardens accessed through the provider’s own network, and standard sites viewed slowly due to cumbersome navigation. The new reality is that
mobile browsers have improved, while applications for live and on demand video playback capabilities have dramatically enhanced navigation and user experience.

Although video support is inherent on most smart phones, delivering content to the phones is not necessarily easy because video cannot always be viewed within the mobile browser. It is handled by a separate video player built into the phone’s operating system (OS), and transition between the browser and the application is not always smooth. Mobile device consumption of video is ready to take another dramatic step forward this year, however, with the introduction of Adobe Flash® v10.1 support for most smart phones. This will not only enable the hardware accelerated browsing of thousands of Flash® powered web sites that were previously inaccessible, but will also allow Flash® video to play within the phone’s browser without having to jump to another application. This capability will allow for ubiquitous access to live video content which is notorious for bringing networks to their knees. Consumers rejoice, but wireless providers are understandably concerned.

The nice thing about mobile handsets today is that they, for the most part, behave like regular computers. Devices access content over standard protocols just like PCs, using HTTP and real-time streaming protocols. Where they are dissimilar, however, is in how they access the Internet, with all requests travelling through the wireless provider’s private network to peering locations. This is less of an issue for wireless providers who are also ISP providers because they typically have expansive, well-connected networks, but the majority of content that people want to view is not within the provider’s network. To make matters worse, as more and more wireless providers offer unlimited data plans, usage and costs increase while revenue remains flat.

To increase performance, the choice is pretty stark; build more network capacity, bring the content closer to the user, or employ a combination of the two.

The first option is fairly simple. Increase infrastructure investment, adding more and bigger pipes, and establish better peering relationships with major ISPs which host the content on the Internet. This will improve overall throughput, but not efficiency. Popular content will continue to be requested from within the network and increasingly consume bandwidth inefficiently.

The second option is to utilize caching technology which will cause content that is popular to be stored closer to the end-user. This will result in fewer trips to the edge of the network because it will be served from within instead, reducing the need for more and bigger pipes.

The news isn’t all bad, though. As wireless data networks become more efficient and better performing, it creates a platform for revenue growth per user. Wireless providers who make the investment will have, not unlike cable providers, a highly connected, video enabled subscriber base. It is an attractive proposition for content owners who are looking to expand their own revenue models with premium content offerings. Exclusive content offerings could be used as an alternative to using the mobile phones themselves as a differentiator for consumers. Finally, consistent high performance and availability is also a highly desirable feature which can be used to attract and retain new users. Bad performance in one aspect of the service will cause a negative perception of the service as a whole.

Advanced handset performance, high speed Internet access, and in-browser Flash support is creating a perfect storm for live and on demand video on the mobile. Wireless providers that are positioned to offer the best access, and content owners that make their video available to wireless users will be on the forefront of a major consumption shift in the mobile industry.

Author - Darcy Lorincz, CEO

Author’s Notes:

Source: “Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update,” Retrieved January 29, 2009, from “Web”

Smooth, and Dynamic, and Adaptive streaming, oh my!

2010-01-08T12:52:00.000-08:00

You may or may not be familiar with a relatively new online video streaming technology that has been around for over a year, but has yet to be fully embraced by most content publishers online. This technology, however, can be hard to describe because it has many names, with each being called something different by the companies that have incorporated it into their player and streaming software.

• Microsoft’s Silverlight calls it Smooth Streaming
• Adobe’s Flash calls it Dynamic Streaming
• Apple’s iPhone/iTouch calls it Adaptive Streaming (or HTTP Streaming)

Although there are some pretty major technical differences in terms of how each of these technologies work, the end result as far as user viewing experience of video content is concerned, is more or less the same. If you have heard of these technologies, you might ask why should I care about smooth/dynamic/adaptive streaming? What is the point? How will it benefit my customers? The major accomplishment of the technology is that you don’t have to compromise the quality of your video online anymore (ok, you still have some limits).

When trying to push the limits of video quality for both live and on-demand, you always have to worry about alienating users with lower bandwidth (dial-up, DSL, 3G) and less powerful computers. As a result, you either have to cater to the lowest denominator, missing an opportunity to provide better quality to those who can see it, or provide a mechanism so that users can switch to a higher quality feed. A high/medium/low toggle helps alleviate some of the issues, but some people may not know they can switch, or may think they should be able to see the high quality feed and end up being frustrated because the video is choppy or won’t play at all. Settings (user preference, session, cookie, etc.) can alleviate constantly having to select “high” quality, but if you travel with your computer the speed of your network can change, for example notoriously horrible hotel connections. Recognizing this problem, an earlier solution was to add player code to automatically select the appropriate bit rate based on bandwidth detection done by timing the download of a test file. This solution did work but it typically only tested at the beginning of the streaming session and wouldn’t react to changes in performance which occur during viewing. This bandwidth only model also provided limited visibility into the performance of the actual computer itself.

Although these issues seem minor, they can be a road block between the user and your content. The situation will also become increasingly exasperated as mobile phones become more like PCs and users transition between 2/3/4G and Wi-Fi networks. The increase in HD content on the web also drives the need for higher bit rates to provide quality viewing experiences for the larger video size.

Then along came smooth/dynamic/adaptive streaming.

With these new adaptive technologies, the user no longer needs to know, choose or even understand. Their computer, player, and, in some cases, the network server they are receiving video from, is responsible for choosing which quality is best for the user’s current and changing situation. This allows a content publisher to optimize their content so that it is viewed in the best possible light in all user capability scenarios as illustrated below. This is especially important for ‘premium’ content which is complimentary or competitive with television viewing.

Adaptive streaming doesn’t just apply to high quality HD content. It can also help benefit end users by providing an optimal version for SD content as well.

However, there are some caveats to this new technology. It won’t make a user’s experience better than their actual bandwidth, for example, if you only have 300 kbps of connectivity you’re not going to magically see HD quality. Additionally, although an end-user only ever connects to one stream at a time, one of the downsides of making higher quality content available is that it can increase your overall bandwidth/CDN delivery costs. Users on high speed cable and fiber optic networks will, for the most part, consume the highest quality stream available. Also, all of the additional outputs, used or not, consume more storage. With decreasing CDN delivery and storage cost, this is less frightening that it used to be.

In a nutshell, smooth/dynamic/adaptive streaming will show your video content in the best possible manner to all end-users, all the time.
For more information on the individual technologies, please see the following links:

• Microsoft Smooth Streaming
• Flash Dynamic Streaming
• Apple iPhone HTTP Streaming

Author - Forest Johns, VP of Solutions Engineering

Is Online Video Here to Stay?

2009-12-09T11:16:00.001-08:00

No matter your generation or your industry-specific career, we’re all trying to stay connected. With a slew of different outlets to choose from, the question is how brands and organizations should keep up with these communicative times. The obvious response is to communicate with your target audience, but the key is to make sure you familiarize yourself with how your particular customers communicate.

People are interactive beings. We not only relate better with person–to-person communications but also have a higher likelihood in trusting the message when both heard and seen. The common sense theory “seeing is believing” stuck for a reason which explains this phenomenon and can be tied to the explosion of online video.

Nearly half of the millennial generation (me included) have reached adulthood and in order to market to these individuals you need to understand their world. They are also the most exposed to new modes of communication such as chat, SMS, and online video. According to a Marketing Charts study http://tinyurl.com/ybou5k7 , the millennial personality communicates in a fast, reliable, frictionless, and honest manner.

So what do I mean by…

Fast
Attention spans vary depending on subject matter but still research has reached a consensus that after six minutes, a person’s attention span begins to decline. This creates a need for people to retain information in a timely fashion and more importantly in a stimulating way. Communicating visually is easier and quicker to comprehend opposed to stagnant text. Most video clips are 3 minutes or less, which fit perfectly into an average user’s attention span.

When I say fast, I’m also referring to the “contagiousness” of online video. Viral marketing is now one of the most powerful ways to promote online. Similar to SEO for text, video, too, can be used to optimize your online presence. It’s called Social Media Optimization, or SMO, through such networks as Del.icious, Reddit, Facebook, just to name a few. Google’s announcement for the real-time indexing of blogs, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and other content also increases the power of these mediums.

Reliable and Frictionless
In the past four years, we’ve seen the Internet community change from being tolerant of low quality YouTube video to now only being concerned with high performance and high quality video.

A perfect compare and contrast scenario is the Alicia Keys live concert vs. the U2 live concert. About a month ago, U2 streamed its first ever global webcast & after three hours worth of live music, the concert was then provided on-demand and turned out to be an unbelievable success http://tinyurl.com/yd6c6l7. Weeks later, Alicia Keys gave a live performance in support of World Aids Day but unlike prior live concert success, the Keys’ event was seen as an underwhelming experience with “… lots of buffering and pixilation…” http://tinyurl.com/ygybqnk

Honest Collaboration
A couple of years ago, the concept of User Generated Content commonly referred to as UGC began to circulate the web. And now, years later, brands and media companies are realizing its worth. UGC has changed business models allowing consumers to become involved with their brand of choice and participate in illustrating their emotional attachment to the brand. This type of customer engagement allows for brands to understand how their customers relate or perceive the brand.

Video has allowed for conversational communication and has empowered the collaborative world we live in. It fosters innovation and provokes different points of view. A company who uses the power of collaboration creates a trustworthy brand.

Author - Nicole Figueiredo, Marketing

Origin Digital goes HD

2009-11-18T09:28:00.000-08:00

Here at Origin Digital, we are frequently asked to explain just what HD, or high definition, means in the online world. The conversation normally starts when the client asks for a “widescreen” player size (16:9 aspect ratio) which has become popular on social media sites such as YouTube who recently switch their default player to widescreen. This is also driven by the explosion of HD television sets in the home, and the closer fit of the widescreen format to our vision (we see in wide screen). HD online is actually more about making that content accessible to everyone versus making sure they can view it at the same quality as on their TV. HD online can be examined using the following characteristics:

• Source format
• Aspect ratio
• Encoding bit rate
• Video size (height by width)

Source Format
As with all video, the available options for outputs are going to be largely driven by what was used to capture the video in the first place. As far as HD goes, there are two camera resolutions, 1280x720 (aka 720) and 1920x1080 (aka 1080). The “i" or “p” denote whether or not the frames of the video are interlaced, where each frame has only 50% of the detail that is flipped back and forth so that the eye perceives a full image, or progressive which displays full detail for each frame. Progressive is how desktop/laptop monitors display video, so anything that is to be displayed on the PC that isn’t progressive must be ‘de-interlaced’. In all instances, it is better to film in progressive if you can.

Aspect Ratio
Aspect ratio for HD is typically 16:9; others are available (16:10, 2.XX:1), but this is the most common. However, even if you filmed content in standard definition, you can still display your video in a widescreen player. This can be done in one of three methods; by having the player display black in the background on the left and right, encoding the video using pillarboxing, or stretching the video until the left and right edges are flush then cropping the top and bottom.

Encoding Bit Rate
HD doesn’t always have to be super high quality to give the end user a good experience. Although broadband has proliferated, not everyone can view 6-8 mbps video. As with all video online, it is important to give the user choices, or use one of the newer adaptive bit rate technologies to make that choice for them. A 16:9 formatted video can be as low as 300 kbps (with the correct corresponding size) or greater than 8 mbps. A ‘good’ top bit rate for HD, however, is anything over 1.5 mbps. This gives a good compromise between accessibility and viewability – especially when delivered over HTTP.

Video Size
Player size corresponds to the bit rate; as your bit rate decreases, so should your video size and vice versa. Players can either display video in a smaller area surrounded by black, or stretch the video to fit (up or down). As interactive options increase outside of the video player (real time feeds, chat, synchronized content, other viewing angles), more and more people are viewing content within a web page as opposed to increasing it to full screen like traditional TV viewing. This further decreases the need for pristine 720/1080 video sizes and bit rates.

You should always consider your audience and how they are consuming your content. If it is a high profile sporting event, then you probably want to push up the bit rate and video size as close to TV as possible. If it is enterprise content, then take advantage of the HD widescreen format but keep your video accessible for those on slower corporate networks as well as provide high quality options for work from home and external users. However, having the widescreen size available as your default player size is ideal as it will encourage people to shoot in HD while still maintaining backwards compatibility with legacy content in standard definition.

Author - Forest Johns, VP of Solutions Engineering