The Clock is Ticking for Joost

Ticking? It’s over.

Kottke just ran a blurb that Vimeo launched HD videos today.

http://www.kottke.org/remainder/07/10/14276.html

http://www.techcrunch.com/2007.....nt-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://fakesteveballmer.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.joost.com/forums/p/.....-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.paulyanez.com/labs/.....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.abc.go.com/streaming/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.pandonetworks.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.mpegla.com/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!

Alright, so I’m not the only one seeing ABC.com technology as a window into the future of HD internet TV.

ATTENTION TC: Please Do an Article!!

I think Silverlight is already streaming high def video.

Joost … who cares. If it is not browser based it does not matter. Why, switching cost. Browser based anything lowers switching cost from non-browser by a lot.

There are ten billion video sites on the internet. Who wants to watch freakin’ videos? I don’t know about you guys, but I want LIVE streaming televsion. Joost and all the other video sites are barking up the wrong tree.

http://www.InternetTvTalk.com

Sloppy reporting - as usual from TechCrunch….

A few obvious problems

1) Joost uses the H264 codec like everyone else. Licensed from CoreAVC (announced right on their homepage: http://www.coreavc.com/)

2) Joost value is the sheer number and diversity of content distribution deals they have in the bag, with a business model for payment.

You only deal with the technical differentiators, which we all know don’t mean much in the court of public opinion.

Erick,
Its nice to see you tuning in on the changing landscape that is digital media.

I have a blog where I specifically talk about this. I covered these issues a while ago. I though I might leave some links to the posts in line with this one.

(Goto my web address above to find these posts. Did not leave links as I would be considered a spammer, and I am not. I am just a guy passionate about digital media, and if you are to, you’ll find my posts.)

Topics from newest to oldest.
1. The AppleTV experiment, what’s the next move?
2. Transcript on life the Universe and Digital Media
3. Last opportunity to be a OSF pioneer of the Internet. Streaming Media Servers.
4. My music is free but my Video is locked up!
5. Television 3.0 starts NOW..
6. Is Watermarks the quarterback for DRM?
7. Apple iMovie exports direct to YouTube as H.264 and not FlashVideo. What does this mean for FlashPlayer?

Number 7 (Where I predicted H.264 for Flash) and 5, where I talk about the ramifications are especially interesting in terms of your article.
Have a good read.
James

Joost is rather a CDN structure than a P2P network comparing with TVKoo, the real time live streaming software. TVkoo was running channels of 350k with 50000 or more users simultaneously with one streaming server of 30Mbps as the source. By netmeter, a net display software, the users can see lot of uploading package by TVKoo, by which the user computer seems to be a mini server.

By this system, the global broadband TV is possible with much fewer resource than ever need. Individuals can use it to setup their own TV station globaly in his home. Differring from Youtube, the VOD system, TVKoo is a live TV globaly.

Great post! But please do not write off Joost as of now. The tech world has lots of dynamics.You never know who goes off first until they actually disappear.

I also think that the Joost might have already foreseen this situation and maybe as we are making noise here, they have already done something to remain afloat. Mark my words. I sign out

Agree with #59. Winning here is not just about technology, in fact it has very little to do with tech. (sorry TC readers). Joost has shown the know how to navigate the media and advertising worlds, and that while they haven’t yet gotten it right, they are thinking more about the experience then just about anyone else. Game hasn’t even started, Erick. A little foolish to call out winners and losers.

Although still just a theory of mine, when I downloaded the joost software way back when (i was an original tester) my hard drive blew out a month later. coincidence…

Although still just a theory of mine, when I downloaded the joost software way back when (i was an original tester) & my cat got run over a month later. coincidence…

Really good post. I downloaded the Adobe Media Player a few weeks back and am convinced that I’ve seen the (albeit Beta version) of the future of TV. I agree that Joost’s days are numbered, but the ease of use and intuitiveness of the Adobe Media Centre - including the AIR bit (i.e. the ability to download content to use offline) - means that it’ll hasten the demise of broadcast TV too.

We’ll look back in ten years time and broadcast TV, where at any given time you can only watch what the channels want to show you, will be totally laughable.

In the UK, some of the leading TV stations are having a ‘+1′ service, i.e. they show the same shows as on the major channel an hour later. Is this how they really think they can maintain their hegemony?

Give it 2 years that the PC will be the de facto ’set top box’. Broadcast TV will be moribund, and joost, with it’s clunky client, not even a footnote.

Move Networks have a few significant innovations for delivering quality video over the web; IT Conversations did a great podcast with Drew Major (Move Chairman) where he explained how it all works:

http://itc.conversationsnetwor.....l1886.html

Basically they enable the player in the client (browser) automatically shift bitrates. This gives 2 great benefits:
1. video starts immediately without the need to buffer (starts at alow bit rate, playing video while it builds a buffer), it then upshifts to higher bitrates and better quality.. in reality this is barely noticeable to users.
2. they ensure a continuous stream of video again by allowing the client to down-shift bitrates, when the underlying tcp connection get congested (as is the nature of the web).

Sure, H264 is a step forward for flash, but Joost will have an edge because its p2p delivery model is insulated from congestion on an individual tcp channel.

If Adobe were to go out and acquire Move, then Joost would be seriously threatened… now once the streaming of high quality video over the web is sorted the battle for the last mile (getting it onto your tv screen) will really heat up…

its not about the technology its about the content deals you make

on2 technologies is the company behind MOVE AND ABC….

VP8 IS UP AND COMING AND LESS EXPENSIVE the h.264

vp6 is what got adobe to where its at…stay tuned for vp8

by the way, vp7 is what powers move and abc

Wow, not sure I buy into those arguments…
Joost is H264, so “new developments” don’t leave them at any particular advantage. In fact mass transcoding is not a big deal should something better come along (Youtube is moving from VP6 to H264, right?).

“Streaming video is about to get a whole lot cheaper”? Based on what? Certainly the CDN price war rages on, but there’s no reason to expect anything other than linear price declines.

P2P will always improve economics, and we are now seeing the first P2P systems that will not regress in QOS.

You need to look where the business is going Erik…large-scale audiences, SD-to-HD quality streams, easy conduit to the television. When you move from an event like MMOD (300Kbps x 275K viewers) to a prime-time broadcast (1-5Mbps x 1M+ viewers), you are talking multiple order-of-magnitude increased cost, congestion, and other issues.

What H.264 and VP7 *finally* give us is the ability to deliver SD quality through the common-denominator broadband connection (a 1.5Mbps AT&T DSL connection). This is the real OTT-ITV story.

Silverlight Silverlight Silverlight

I know that 99% of Techcrunch bloggers hate MSFT guts but their Silverlight is significantly better than anything Adobe or Joost will release in the next 18 months.

#69: I seem to recall that Adobe beat MSFT to the punch with Flex… But, your right, MSFT is unstoppable… NOT! It’s a dinosaur.

Erick, you are right on the money.

One thing to note. We’re building everything on FP9.5 and support for H.264, both in our native web-based players and in Brightcove Show. That will mean that any media publisher looking for a Joost-quality experience can get it quickly and easily.

But a few things of note on top of this.

Joost also does a couple of things that can’t be accomplished just with FP9.5 and H.264 on their own:

- Peer-assisted, multi-source streaming (hybrid delivery model) that enables faster bit delivery and lower costs. That’s exactly what we’ve integrated into BC Show using DNA, but on top of FP 9.5 which will mean that these are instant-on, great experiences. Also, to get to DVD and HD quality bit-rates (btw, Joost is much lower, with average video encoding at 600kbps not 1.5Mbps) one needs delivery network acceleration like we’re doing in BC Show.

- Full-screen browsing, discovery and watching modes. Joost has a nice full-screen paradaigm. While someone can build this themselves in FP9.5, we’re providing publishers with templates for ‘theater mode’ browsing and watching, of course these can be branded to the site and media owner.

- Full-screen, feature-length content advertising formats. Joost has done some nice work in this space. We have done much of the same in our web-based experiences (overlays, bugs, bumpers, takeovers) and in BC Show are updating all of these formats and the insertion and management tools to support full-screen, feature-length content.

Our goal, in the end, is to enable a web-centric model of high-quality Internet TV (e.g. any website and publisher should be able to launch these kinds of rich Internet TV services and not have to rely on an aggregator or a desktop application to get there).

Jeremy

Well its not just the H264 in the next version of flash that should help drive higher-res net video. Theres also hardware-accelerated fullscreen mode, which makes a big difference to cpu use, or at least did for me during some testing, and also a new version of the VP6 codec, called VP6-S which takes less grunt to decode and so may be useful for hgher res video on older machines. I mean lets face it, I love h264 but it does eat quite a lot of cpu.

As for Silverlight, yes it has plenty of potential. But if everyone is determined to hate it then it wont succeed. I also think that in terms of video, the new flash and silverlight will be pretty equally matched, so it will come down to other factors like plugin penetration, codec licensing terms, whether all your video assets are already in a particular format, and what languages, tools & servers developers at the company have.

Im sure Joost has its problems, and browser-based video getting steadily better certainly does not help those with alternative wondertech. eg I think it was Veoh that started off as p2p video delivery system being its strength and then had to shift massively to reflect the sudden popualrilty of youtube-like flash video. But of Joost’s technology is just good enough, enough people know of them, and they actually have compelling content that lots of people would want to watch, then there’s no reason to expect flash or silverlight to be the death of them.

All the same if I were trying to start a company that used p2p, Id be very tempted to try making my software a browser plugin rather than a standalone app, but I think compelling content could overcome such issues.

“(Youtube is moving from VP6 to H264, right?).”

No, Youtube does not use VP6. Neither does MySpace or Google for their Flash video. They still use H.263. That’s one of the primary reasons why Flash with VP6 has a bad reputation. People think it’s VP6 when it is not.
Personally I don’t care what codec is used in what players. I’ve seen HD video in VP6, VP7, H.264, Divx, VC-1, etc. To me HD is HD. When the videos are in HD I can’t tell what codec is being used anyway.

The technology is only one aspect of any business plan. I think one has to take into account the experience that the founders of Joost have had commercially and the money they have to put behind brand awareness campaigns and marketing. Youtube is awash with rough cut content that is a little overwhelming for most. Small players may find it hard to find their way into larger scale consciousness (though not impossible). I see the future of Joost as a good horse to back in the eventual reorganisation of the media audience.

What any Chinese person or International Soccer fanatic can tell you is that Joost is to the ‘future of television’ as the Fax Machine was to the Internet.

True P2P TV options do exist–TVAnts, SopCast, and several others. Despite the fact they are primarily in Chinese, it has managed to catch hold of the International sports community in a HUGE way. Look up p2p ‘football’ and you’ll find the links and the instructions on how to watch your favorite club from the otherside of the world pretty much anytime you want.

(I’m watching rally driving on Eurosports France right now).

I’m not sure if the a-list blogging community has even tried TVAnts or the others, but running it will show Joost to be too late for the next revolution.

I agree completely with the article. It seems that the community and media are moved by huge inertias.
If behind Joost there would be others, that project would probably never be funded. In case they manage to launch the project it would be dumped by the community because it’s nonsense to go with a a desktop application when there is technology to go web. ie http://www.dnastream.tv

Handful of mistakes here:

1. The quality of web video will not improve. It won’t. H.264 looks worse than VP6.2 (flv4) or Sorenson (flv1) at the same data rates. YouTube isn’t going to double their bandwidth costs.

2. Jeremy #71 is correct in stating costs of streaming for high quality stuff are much higher, so p2p continues to have its place.

3. The minor reason for the adoption of H.264 is PROBABLY because Adobe and her customers (YouTube/Google) want to use a codec other than Sorenson (flv1).

4. Silicon Video decoders are the real issue. All the major video decoders used in IPTV set top boxes make use of VC-1 (windows media 10) and H.264. They don’t decode On2’s VP6.2 or sorenson. The “watch the web on TV” thing was supposed to happen in 2005, the chip guys all adopted VC-1, and while that was happening Flash video exploded and suddenly there wasn’t any WMV video online to see. Very soon, all that web video is going to show up on TV devices that cost a lot less than AppleTV - and then we’re off to the races.

As a good player of web TV, I have used almost all kinds of softwares in this aspect no matter it is p2p or CDN. According to my testing experience TVkoo is the best one to set up a global web TV, after using TVkoo you will find all other softwares you used before are totaly rubbish.
So go and download the TVkoo software and you will enjoy fantastic global web TV.

Excellent article, I want LIVE streaming televsion!!!

just look at the http://hobnox.com Channels (f.e., sly-fi.com ) they are showing fullscreen videos already in Flash 9

Saw the HD vids on Vimeo, but wasn’t really blown away by the quality. I think stages6 (divx codec) is doing a more better job of delivering high quality vids (even full movies….joox anyone?) then the vids I saw on Vimeo.

Joost is opening up their APIs and being really smart with widgets. If they stay ahead in the plugin arena then many users will fuel their success.

Take for example Joostlist.com: http://www.joostlist.com

Its a mash up between Joost channel guide and Digg. Sites like this will determine the success of any online TV service.