Re: What FlashCom features do you want
Web Server forum
Back To The Forum Home!Search!Private Messaging System

Web Server Talk Web Server Talk > Web Servers reviews > Macromedia Flash Server > Re: What FlashCom features do you want




  Last Thread   Next Thread Next
  Show Printable Version Email this Page Subscribe to this Thread      Post New Thread    Post A Reply      

    Re: What FlashCom features do you want  
Simon Skrødal


View Ip Address Report This Message To A Moderator Edit/Delete Message


 
08-25-05 07:45 AM

I agree that the pricing is ridicolous - it might not have been so bad a =
few
years ago, but today 'everyone' is on broadband, and video is being pushe=
d
more and more on the net.

We use FCS on a smaller scale, but are still challenged with the licensin=
g.
Hopefully MM will lift some restrictions soon, though...

I don't agree with some of your points regarding AS and server-side
functionality. While I am sure you might be able to do similar stuff (for
video) on other streaming servers, I don't believe they are as easy to
develop as on the FCS, and of course, FCS offers more than just video
streaming... (I'd like to see a Real conferencing application using SMIL
that compares to what you can build with Flash).

We use FCS for streaming video due to its cross-browser, cross-platform
compatability, and because of the ease of creating custom players with
custom functionality. It works, and it looks the same on any system. As a=
n
end user, I hate Real for all the bull they put you through when installi=
ng
and registering the player/plug-in (used to hate, I have been ignoring re=
al
for a good 5 years now, so they might have changed). QuickTime has its
moments, but again, once you install the player, processes start running =
in
the background, there are 'reminders' about upgrading yadayadayada...

As a developer, having worked with Helix in the past to stream Real and W=
M,
I must say that the move to Flash and FCS was a delight. I learnt FCS mon=
ths
before I downloaded a trial for Flash and started client-side development=
as
well. The Flash/FCS combo, paired with remoting, which makes it a trio, I
guess , opens up a whole new world of opportunities. I am sure most of =
you
know what I mean when I say only your imagination is the limit (well, and
the licencing, of course)...

I'll stop rambling, but I agree with Kevin's view on the licensing. MM ne=
eds
to make money, but come on... at least make it feasible to the developer.=
..

Kind regards,
Simon Skr=F8dal

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Kevin Day" <toasty-A9G4PF0S4yWzR313v1King@public.gmane.org>
To: "FlashComm Mailing List" <flashcomm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@pub
lic.gmane.org>; "Simon Lo=
rd"
<slord-1+jUDDTtyItWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] What FlashCom features do you want
inafutureversionofFlash?


>
> On Aug 25, 2005, at 12:32 AM, Simon Lord wrote: 
>
>
> Before we deployed anything, we looked heavily at Real, QuickTime,
> WMP, and every minor player out there.
>
> Here's the comparison we came up with:
>
> Real's Helix server is completely free
> Real's commercial Helix Unlimited (perpetual license) server is $8999
> retail.
> Real's commercial Helix Universal Unlimited (perpetual license) is
> around $12000.
> Quicktime Server is free with an XServe. I could buy a brand new
> XServe and get an unlimited perpetual license + OS + new hardware for
> $3995.
> Windows Media Server is just a license for Windows Server 2003
> Standard, which is around $700, and includes an OS.
>
>
> Assuming we want to push as much bandwidth as we feel like it (we
> can't plan for sudden peaks, and we want to send high quality
> streams) - which also makes the comparisons to the above products
> more equal, for one year we have to pay:
>
> $4500 for the base server
> $27996 for 1 year of unlimited bandwidth ($6999 for an 90 unlimited
> capacity pack x 4)
>
> To make matters worse, what we were able to accomplish on one server
> (Dual 3.06Ghz Xeon for WMP and Real, Dual 2Ghz G5 for Quicktime)
> required two servers with FCS because of increased CPU and memory
> utilization.
>
> When spread over a 3 year period (how long we'd estimate most of our
> projects to last):
>
> Real: $12,000 (worst case)
> Quicktime: $3,995 (Plus we get a free server and free OS)
> Windows: $700 (Plus we get a free OS)
> Flash: $176,876 ( 2x $88488)
>
>
> On top of that, a 128k stream using the latest QuickTime, Real or WMP
> codec is approximately equal to the best you can squeeze out of Flash
> at 256k, so our bandwidth costs also double.
>
> This is why so many of us are complaining about the license, Simon.
> It's even worse when you're looking at Real and Quicktime's free
> offerings. Do you honestly think AS and SO are worth $164k+? 
> 
>
>
> AS is nice. BUT, QuickTime has hooks for AppleScript and C modules.
> Real/Helix has the full source and there are lots of plug-ins that
> the community has developed, or you can write your own. Windows Media
> has .NET integration, as well as VB interfaces. AS isn't a bad
> language, but I really don't think it's being used in a way that
> works well for server-side logic. We've developed applications on all
> of them, I don't really find what FCS has to offer any different.
>
> Shared Objects are interesting, but only proprietary to Flash because
> Macromedia chooses to make them so. The same code can be implemented
> with XML Sockets and any application server back end.
>
> I mean no disrespect to the engineers at Macromedia who spend their
> time here, but: The whole FCS product is nice, but not nearly worth
> the price they're charging. I don't mind paying them for the product,
> but when you're running up against "Free" and "comes with your
> server", you can't price yourself out of most company's price range.
>
> If we could buy unlimited perpetual per-server licenses for... even
> matching the highest other price I have up there, we'd buy them by
> the dozen. As it is now, we tried one project with it, found it
> usable, but way more expensive than practical.
>
> I think Macromedia/Adobe needs to get on the "We'd like some money
> rather than none" bandwagon. 
>
>
>
> =3D-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =3D-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>


=3D-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=3D-----------------------------------------------------------

To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm






[ Post a follow-up to this message ]



    Sponsored Links  




 





   All times are GMT. The time now is 06:46 PM.      Post New Thread    Post A Reply      
  Last Thread   Next Thread Next


Most Popular forums 

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is OFF
 
Medical and Health forum | Computer Games Reviews | Graphics design forum

Back To The Top
Home | Usercp | Faq | Register