There’s a time bomb out there with Joost’s name on it. Full-screen, broadcast-quality video streams—the main selling point of Joost’s peer-to-peer Internet TV client software—is quickly coming to the Web. Brightcove will soon be offering such streams to its video publishers using BitTorrent DNA. But the real threat to Joost will be coming from Adobe and its ubiquitous Flash player.
Sometime in the next few months, Adobe is expected to incorporate the H.264 codec in all Flash players with the general release of Flash Player 9. You can already download a beta version from Adobe Labs. The H.264 codec is part of MPEG-4 and is the codec that Apple uses to compress all of the video downloads on iTunes. Once H.264 is part of Flash, the quality of streaming video on the Web will roughly double at current bandwidth speeds. That means YouTube videos will look twice as good—and those will likely remain on the low end in quality.
Every video site on the Web (and quite a few that are still in stealth) is just waiting for Flash Player 9 to be distributed widely and become the new standard. That will allow them to launch their own full-screen Internet TV services with video streams that are just as good or better than Joost’s, and that will require nothing more than a regular browser to watch.
Joost’s greatest asset right now is not its peer-to-peer technology. It’s the momentum it’s gained so far by being an early mover. When Joost finally came out of its private beta on October 1, it had already signed up one million beta users and seeded its network with 15,000 shows. But the vast majority of that video is not exclusive to Joost. All the Internet TV services are lining up the same content. And better-quality video is not going to remain a differentiator for long.
As compression technologies get better, video sites will be able to dial up the quality of the video streams. Joost’s P2P approach is not a benefit to the consumer as much as it is a benefit to Joost (because it offloads the bandwidth costs of the most popular video streams to the users themselves). But streaming video on the Web is about to get a whole lot cheaper—and as Web video advertising takes off, a whole lot more lucrative. Some people argue that once the economics kick in, centralized Web streaming will offer a better, more consistent viewing experience than P2P streaming. That’s why H.264 is so important. It will change the economics of streaming.
Joost’s only remaining competitive barrier will be its network of viewers and their interactions among each other, along with the third-party apps built around it. If viewers feel that the experience of watching videos on Joost is more social or pleasurable than watching streams by themselves on the Web, maybe they’ll stick around. But social features are not exclusive to Joost, and neither are its platform ambitions. The slam-dunk days for Joost will soon be over.
Ticking? It’s over.
Kottke just ran a blurb that Vimeo launched HD videos today.
http://www.kott...7/10/14276.html
http://www.tech...comment-1668568
1rst!, woops, 2nd. I said it first dammit!
Although high quality content may (or may not) be exclusive to Joost – part of their value proposition it has always claimed is that Joost provides the network effect of users watching video in a new and unique way. If H.264 becomes pervasive, that only helps Joost up the notch in their quality standard as well, and not necessarily leave them behind (everyone rises with the tide).
Let’s hope they provide enough incentive (and userbase) for 3rd party developers to explore their API platform to extend its engagement factor beyond passive video watching. They need to encourage their license partners to make the Joost experience deeper and more social for them to hit the tipping point. Otherwise, Joost will just be yet-another online distribution for their content partners.
Eric:
Excellent article. We get on you for the junk articles (MS ZUME), and we should in turn give you some love when your articles rock. Nice job!
I read the Kottke post too, those video’s looked excellent.
I didnt like Joost for some reason, something about the player itself not the content. With the quality of Flash based video getting steadily better, I have to agree with your view.
Joost is not doomed. Joost made some pretty impressive contracts, I doubt that it’ll be easy to match that. Yes, high-definition video will become a commodity in the next years, but the user interface won’t be so easy to copy. I can’t imagine that any time soon.
Also, if I watch TV on the computer, I don’t want to do that in the browser.
But: If this video-in-the-browser-stuff should ever become a reality, expect Joost to jump on that ship. They have 45 million dollars in venture capital and a group of highly capable developers – this wouldn’t be a problem for them.
Great write up, Eric.
Its always great to see a write up that challenges the status quo with valid points.
I have to agree with you on this one.
I personally have used Joost and I don’t like peer to peer technology. This download is painful. I think the future is in streaming media using Flash 9.
-Augustus
One possible outcome is an acquisition by Google or Yahoo – then being incorporated in search results on the personalized pages.
This technology will not just fade away because of Adobe – someone will invest in it and develop it to be more innovative
Joost has already made it base. So it definetly has an edge on it. Good thought from TechCrunch.
http://blogkatt.blogspot.com
No need to mess arround with this! We have already done it, just buy Vista exteneded media pack premium edition 64 bit alpha 2. It comes with full access to the MS Stream of all our board meetings and parking lot security cams!
http://fakestev...er.blogspot.com
Excellent article. Totally agree with the use of the H.264 codec. Joost should use it.
Joost is still too much like plain old TV (TV 1.0?). The interface is a bit clunky and it’s still the same old story – 15,000 shows and nothing’s on. I’d love to see all the web video sites up their quality, but I hope they will also still offer smaller sizes for videos. Not everything needs to be viewed in HD quality.
Wow, those Vimeo HD videos are awesome! Now I just need a quicker pipe
Excellent article Eric, appreciate it.
http://vidsonly.blogspot.com
I think this service will fail because it’s too early for such a service. They have seriously bandwith issues. They won’t go away anytime soon. These guys made a lot of money with Skype. They should hang it up for a while.
Joost’s differentiator has never been about video quality – good quality is table-stakes. Having worked in media, it is always about content, content, content. Joost is lining up a broad library of key content, some exclusive that will be difficult to match.
ps – the p2p technology is not a quality play anyway, it is a cost play. Joost bandwidth costs (if they reach scale) will be a fraction of multicast technologies.
Joost’s original “promise” was “annotated television”, they even hired an RDF expert – but never delivered. I have been beta testing Joost almost since day one and there is still NO means to add a comment at a certain point in time and have it appear as my friends watch the same show ( Justin.TV and Viddler both have that now ).
The move for Joost to make was annotated TV, forget their lame P2P seeding, boring content, et al. The clock was ticking and has since expired.
Joost’s goal is to bring television to the internet, rather than bring internet to television.
@ 13, I totally agree. Add to that the first shows were lame stuff, MTV’s Sweet 16, etc. Besides, I’m always on the run and can’t just settle down to see what’s available while at the computer. Also, I had problems at times with their beta for the Mac.
We’ve been experimenting with Flash 9 and H.264 and have had great results thus far. If Adobe makes a push for wide adoption like they did with 8, I expect to see a lot more high quality video across the Web as the barrier to entry for distribution decreases.
So, Joost becomes the main Flash Player upgrade tool.
Love it!
Thanks for the excellent perspective as usual Eric. Allow me to add some additional insider perspective on the subject …
Video quality is only one of the benefits P2P video streaming technology such as Joost’s brings to IP Video. Some equally compelling benefits are:
1. Cost – P2P shares server bandwidth demand with viewers, thus reducing a content owners bandwidth bill — especially for hi-demand videos.
2. Performance – with P2P the more people watch a video, the faster and better performing it becomes for the next guy – the exact opposite of server-only delivery.
3. Scale – P2P video streaming is practically infinitly scalable since supply is directly proportional to demand.
Content owners should consider what’s important to them and make informed technology decisions accordingly. Its all about the content at the end of the day.
I’m moderating a panel at Streaming Media West on the CDN’s take on this subject if anyone is interested in continuing the conversation:
http://tinyurl.com/2mebwx
Thanks for the excellent perspective as usual Eric. Allow me to add some additional insider perspective on the subject …
Video quality is only one of the benefits P2P video streaming technology such as Joost’s brings to IP Video. Some equally compelling benefits are:
1. Cost – P2P shares server bandwidth demand with viewers, thus reducing a content owners bandwidth bill — especially for hi-demand videos.
2. Performance – with P2P the more people watch a video, the faster and better performing it becomes for the next guy – the exact opposite of server-only delivery.
3. Scale – P2P video streaming is practically infinitely scalable since supply is directly proportional to demand.
Content owners should consider what’s important to them and make informed technology decisions accordingly. Its all about the content at the end of the day.
I’m moderating a panel at Streaming Media West on the CDN’s take on this subject if anyone is interested in continuing the conversation:
http://tinyurl.com/2mebwx
Any comment on the fact that I would estimate that a large percentage of users are unable to see any video on Joost, as a result of the changes made in version 0.9 from 0.8.1?
http://www.joos...t-see-any-video!-what-do-i-do/
As far as I am concerned, Joost is doomed unless they fix their client app, because I don’t think their suggestion to make changes to viewers’ router settings is a scalable model.
“Full-screen, broadcast-quality video streams” I wish. Joost has never delivered anything close to this kind of quality. The playing field is still wide open for someone who can deliver a killer OTT app.
I don’t believe it was a coincidence that the day Joost 1.0 quietly launched, eBay publicly announced the $1.2 billion write down for Joost founders’ former company, Skype. Sounds like a clear warning to any company considering working with or acquiring Joost.
Can someone please explain why anyone would fund a company that delivers someone else’s content in low qualty over a peer to peer network that has trouble supporting content delivery on a good computer let alone a mobile device?
Silicon Valley prides itself on funding companies with seasoned management teams. Does that include those who are good at selling the world a bill of goods?
Erick,
great article.
Timing is awesome, I just finished my Joost Beta 1.0 mashup
http://www.paul...eta1/index.html
I can’t wait till H.264
“Joost’s greatest asset right now is not it’s peer-to-peer technology. It’s the momentum its gained so far by being an early mover.” Erick: I was hoping that you would save TC from Duncan’s it’s/its confusion. But twice in one sentence? The editor needs an editor.
Erick said: …..”But the real threat to Joost will be coming from Adobe and its ubiquitous Flash player.”
YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. HENCE, ANOTHER REASON THAT GOOGLE SHOULD PONY UP AND BUY ADOBE!!!!!!
Joost sucks. Their content is crap and the software is crap.
Joost is great! The full screen playback is much appreciated by me, since I watch Joost hooked up to my TV. The streaming is great, even on my slow 1 MBPS connection. The quality is pretty good, but it is the shows that make Joost what it is. I challenge you to find full episodes of “Welcome Back Kotter” anywhere else on the net. Yes, where Joost really shines is the content. They have an entire channel dedicated to Godzilla! How can you top that?
Best article i read recently on TC.
One important thing to notice , Iphone Youtube player uses H.264 codec , and Youtube is going crazy converting all their clips to the new codec , if you upload new clip to Youtube and then search for it on your Iphone after few hours you will find it there , which means all new uploads are converted to H.264 codec in real time.
This lead me to believe the Google (Youtube) is getting ready for the new flash player , and they will make their site H.264 codec ready the same day the new player is released.
Joost will never make into public or IPO. Here’s why…
They launch poor content, taking too long to load, crashes, slow down, users have hard time closing software while streaming. It’s doesn’t look like web 2.0. Everyone think Joost is just public shareware. Why didn’t Joost make something like TV flash plug-in like Youtube?
Several states have different MBPS connection. Don’t think Joost is fastest online TV streaming using P2P. My friend & engineers tried it. It’s sucks…
They built the product from stretch.
Great article!
Kazaa infected tens of millions of computers worldwide with spyware. Never forget how badly they infected people against their will a few years ago when you think of Joost.
Does it matter if I still can’t find Get Smart episodes anywhere?
Seriously:
With all these video networks and psuedo networks popping up, it seems like they have the same content of interest, lots of unique crap, and plenty of user experience issues.
Is it fair to say that none of them will matter in the long run? Aren’t the days of “content is king” pretty much over? If not, then why are there 100 copies of every music video sitting on every video network out there? We just want to find and play a video easily and with quality – we don’t care where it’s coming from, how it’s getting to us, and who created it in the first place.
My money is with the company that builds a system that feeds me what I want, including the things I didn’t know I wanted, and pulls them from EVERYWHERE. Sounds like amazon.
Amazing career have that guys…you have all the reason in the sentence”competitive barrier will be its network of viewers and their interactions among each other…”
See u guys
Kisses!
Joost………….soon coming to Techcrunch Deapool. May it rest in peace.
did something happened to techcrunch.com an hour back……… wasn’t able too log on to the site..
What type of technology is ABC.com using for it’s “Full Episode Player”?
http://dynamic....reaming/landing
This is far superior to any other major network’s internet TV!
+1 to Erick’s post
I always wondered if it is impossible to create an app/plugin that would play videos in a browser with a flash player interface and have the added functionality and benefit of p2p.
If only I could post joost tv channels/content on a blog/website.
We have to remember that part of surviving is building a sustainable business model. Joost is well on it’s way to doing this; they are building off an already impressive user-base which over start-up’s/incumbents do not have.
Technology is only one side, content the other. But don’t forget that content owners want to make money from their content and this is where Joost has made a pretty strong point – it’s currently the only iTV service which has serious plans to make it easily possible to content owners to get the revenue they’re looking for: it has a well planned, built-in advertisement platform…
Just think of the possibilities as soon as they unleash their collected data about the viewing habits of their users – ads targetted with utmost precision will be possible. This is a really valuabe difference to current mass advertising and I don’t see anybody else on the market enabling the content and ads industry to do just that – and Flash won’t help with that either…
ABC (Disney) is using technology provided by Move Networks. It is far superior to anything on the web and was introduced over a year ago.
I think Joost will survive and prosper. I also think there’ll be a lot of early traction gained by aggregators/indexers of content. We put http://www.testcard.tv/ live last week and have seen the traffic really take off – I think people really don’t care how they get it – they just want access to a lot of content in one place with a simple, easy UI. I’m an investor in Testcard TV so I guess I’m bias but if our early traffic is anything to go by – there’s room for a lot of players out there.
Sebastian (Comment 42),
Its called Pando Video Booster:
http://www.pand...works.com/demos
Check out the Samurai Video (in native Flash player)
When you talk about high quality internet video Joost is top of mind at this moment. You can’t just beat such position, even not with technology. Once people love a brand, they’ll tend to stay with it. And besides that Joost can always improve or change its technology to catch up with the other services.
Seriously guys. HD is already on the web with the leading content. I thought this blog was informed, but its literally behind.
Go to ABC.com, click on “Full Episodes”, and then once the window loads – “Now Watch Episodes in HD”. There is Desperate Housewives streamed in HD. Looks great on a big 24″ monitor. As noted in previous content, this is technology from Move Networks — who is actually taking share from Adobe Flash video, which is far too expensive.
I’m a bit late with my comment, and I hope I’m not repeating old news, but I think there are some potential speed bumps with the flash+H.264 takes over the world scenario. This is based on my understanding of the situation. Please correct me if I’m wrong:
1. “The end user license to the Adobe Flash Player allows users to playback H.264 content for your own non-commercial use. Commercial use of the Flash Player to decode H.264 video may require a separate license.” If you are using it for commercial use, you have to pay license fees once you get above a certain number of clients. That fee tops out at $4.25MM *per year*, but it looks like they’re raising that to $5MM next year. (http://www.mpeg...avc/avc-faq.cfm).
2. At this moment in time, Adobe requires the use of their streaming media server for streaming H.264 video which currently costs $4500 (per server?), which can add up for very large video streaming sites.
I know that some companies can easily absorb that cost, but it’ll be more difficult for small startups who have strong viral growth but little in the way of revenue, thus making it even more difficult for new startups to get into the game.
– Scott
Completely agree with you Stokdaddy (#17). The user does not care about the technology – what is however important is:
(1) great movies and TV (not content which didn’t work in traditional channels and has been repackaged)
(2) a compelling an intuitive user interface
(3) smart discovery – based upon content my friends enjoy
(4) that it just works! no stopping/starting or jittering
I have been trying out Jaman and love the service – it has these issues nailed and has some great movies on offer. So much so that I cancelled my Blockbuster account. Thanks guys!