Comments on: Full Stream Ahead: RipCode Raises $12.5 Million For Video Transcoding

By: Ripcode recibe 12,5M

Ripcode recibe 12,5M — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:59:53 +0000

[...] una compañía de streaming y servicios de transcodificación de vídeo online, ha recibido una ronda de financiación de 12,5 millones de dólares dirigida por Granite Ventures con la participación de Hunt Ventures, El Dorado Ventures, Vesbridge [...]

By: shjasonli

shjasonli — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:13:45 +0000

what’s the messages?

Create or join a crunchie’s chat group at http://groups.im/

By: Jeff Malkin

Jeff Malkin — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:39:10 +0000

I agree Jon. Encoding.com has moved encoding services to the cloud.

By: john

john — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:11:36 +0000

one company has provided mobile encoding and play service to watch videos on cell phone, like http://Vuclip.com

By: Marty

Marty — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:28:03 +0000

Didn’t encoding.com try this already?

By: Konto

Konto — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:29:55 +0000

It’s getting to the point that I dread visiting the homepage.

Make a resolution for 2009 to lose some of the page weight and the excess clutter.

http://www.jugargame.com/

By: Grokodile

Grokodile — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:16:41 +0000

Some of you guys think too small.

Say you are Sony, Paramount or Universal Music and have gazillions of media titles that you want to distribute.

Do you really want to create a huge translation process when (assuming you have digital media already) you can just make it available to everyone instantly with no up-front cost or effort?

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:10:27 +0000

I would prefer to invest my money in a company that concentrated on it’s technology rather than it’s logo. I take it as a GOOD sign that they couldn’t care less about their logo.

Jon
http://Buzvia.com – Where’s Your Traffic Going?

By: Diego

Diego — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:01:26 +0000

Then why didnt you do it BEFORE?

By: Daves

Daves — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 07:38:00 +0000

What a waste. I could do the same with a few scripts and EC2 nodes.

By: Jonathan Lambert

Jonathan Lambert — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:55:05 +0000

That’s what we built: it’s a video transcoder in the cloud that brokers most of the major CDN solutions. Just pop it in with SOAP to any platform. Ping me if you want details.

By: David Geller

David Geller — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:53:49 +0000

Innovation doesn’t stop. Imagine, for a minute, that the state-of-the-art keeps improving and we have a format much better than H.264 in MPEG4 a few years from now (faster, better color, less motion blur, etc.). Now – without products like this you might find yourself having to re-encode a zillion files. I’m not saying this is the penultimate transcoding engine (I actually don’t know much about it), but there’s definitely a need for rapid, flexible video encoding – especially with everyone digesting it now on their phones, PCs, DVRs, etc. Flash continues to evolve too (and ON2 is the actually developer of their high-end video formats).

It may be hard to imagine, but you don’t have to sell that many appliances in the $10 – $50K range to have a successful company. And, I promise, there are many, many more organizations, companies, sites, etc. that want an easy way to service the highly varied video needs of their audiences.

I’ll stop commenting now lest people think I work for these guys or something. I don’t. Eyejot uses ffmpeg!

By: chris

chris — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:43:13 +0000

I don’t see a big future for this type of product. Eventually almost all devices will play Flash movies or MP4’s (which in Flash 10 is practically the same thing anyway). You could kind of compare this service to a DVD player that plays all formats – not much point if there is one single dominant format.

By: josh

josh — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:42:45 +0000

By customizing the end user experience they are saving loading times, bandwidth, etc. for mobile users. I think a big portion of their product is streaming the right size of video to the right devices.

By: David Geller

David Geller — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:39:34 +0000

The beauty of their solution, from what I understand (and I’m doing lots of guessing) is that they can transcode on the fly – without having to keep actual files around. This means you can create a stream compatible with, say, your mobile phone needing a myopic QCIF format file to your iPhone that can swallow a hansom H.264 encoded file, all from the original source material. If it’s fast enough (and faster than wire/broadband load speeds then it lets companies deploy a video distribution format more easily and faster.

It’s like the Star-imprinting machine from Dr. Seuss. Video file goes in one end and bits for a specific format and frame rate (and audio format) come out the other end.

Having cloud resources is great. It’s still very difficult to manage pedabytes of video content – especially when lots of it is, often, access infrequently. With a solution like this you might not have to.

By: David Geller

David Geller — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:33:42 +0000

Congrats to them! There’s definitely a need.

Seattle had a startup a few years ago named PictureIQ that had a similar appliance play but was, at the time, targeting formats specifically for mobile phones. Tom Hull, formally of LapLink and Visio, led them.

I hope, though, they send Fabrice Bellard a bone. He started ffmpeg.

By: fb9371562

Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:20:51 +0000

I don’t see a future in a company selling proprietary video transcoding appliances. Sure, some deep pocketed companies are going to buy them, but most people will stick with general use servers/cloud computing and open source software.

By: Joe Ca

Joe Ca — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:12:54 +0000

Do we need so many formats? Doesn’t http://www.keepvid.com allow users to download youtube videos?

By: Ian Mikutel

Ian Mikutel — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:09:26 +0000

WOW. RipCode CEO Brendon Mills look like Donnie Osmond. http://www.ripcode.com/ (RipCode Blog pic) http://is.gd/eEXi (Donnie Osmond)

By: RipCodeがストリーミングビデオのデバイス別コード変換に$12.5Mを調達して全速前進

RipCodeがストリーミングビデオのデバイス別コード変換に$12.5Mを調達して全速前進 — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:09:18 +0000

[...] [原文へ] [...]

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:04:12 +0000

these guys are solving a real big issue. This is something I would have also invested in these economic times. They virtually have no competition and is absolutely required to deliver streaming video. Picks and shovels….

I can only imagine the deer in the headlights some VC’s must of had when these guys presented. “What do you mean you don’t do social networking”.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:43:52 +0000

I agree. That logo looks $2.99

By: Tim Garner

Tim Garner — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:40:33 +0000

$12.5 million… maybe now they can afford a logo that doesn’t suck.

By: AnthonyF

AnthonyF — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:30:54 +0000

Love any company tweaking streaming video tech!!!

By: Ian Mikutel

Ian Mikutel — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:25:10 +0000

It would be great if a site like TubeMogul (http://www.tubemogul.com) could incorporate something like this.

I’m just about to start doing a lot of video content, and would love a simple transcode/distribution solution.