The biggest problem with people "not being able to see" Quicktime is not that they do not have Quicktime installed, but rather they are probably using Internet Explorer which will not Fast-Start Quicktime unless the video is embedded in an HTML page, otherwise IE will wait till the entire video downloads before it shows anything. This is a problem for videobloggers who simply link directly to the video file as the FreeVlog tutorials suggest.
Instead of direct linking to the video file, I suggest using a popup window with the video embedded. This is why I wrote a code generator to do that: < http://joshkinberg.com/popupmaker > This method creates a popup window with the video embedded while still preserving the direct link to the video file in HTML so that FeedBurner and other enclosure-creation services will continue to work. As a side note, Rocketboom uses embedded Quicktime player every day and has never had people complain that they can't see it because they don't have Quicktime (of course, RB also provides alternative WMV just in case, and some Windows users prefer that) Now, when it comes to Quicktime H.264 videos, the viewer does need to have the latest version of Quicktime installed... but that's no different than the latest version of Flash Video which uses a new codec only compatible with Flash 8. > I wouldn't have thought so, but, in spite of repeated installs of QuickTime > (in FireFox), there were some sites whose QT video I simply couldn't play - > HumanDog was one, to my great frustration. With the new 1.5 version of > Firefox it seems to be even more broken - I ran into a site recently that > crashed the browser completely if I tried to play a QT video. I am on Windows using Firefox. I have Quicktime installed. I have no problem viewing Human-Dog's videos. I have not experienced the problems you are referring to. > From what I can tell, a lot more people are viewing my SWF files in whatever > aggregator than are viewing the FLV files directly on my site. So I don't > see what the problem is? At the risk of sounding like a jerk, do you really think your site gets enough traffic to provide a representative sample of anything? -Josh On 12/23/05, Deirdre Straughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 12/23/05, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > (to do Flash Video well is > > still rather difficult for the individual, there are many steps > > involved and you have to be rather proficient with Flash, which is > > both expensive and confusing). > > I'm hardly proficient in Flash. I have the full software (got it at a > bargain price), but have hardly used it. I got Sorenson Squeeze instead > which is a lot easier. > > Thanks to something you said in here a week or so ago, I'm now using the > lovely Flash player by Jeroen Wijering. This involves a bit more fiddling - > it wouldn't be hard for someone more proficient than I to take his player a > step further towards user-friendliness. <hint hint> > > FWIW, I have rarely if ever had anyone say they couldn't see/play my videos. > And I have had several compliments from people who really like the way it > looks on the page. > > > I don't buy the argument that its hard for people to install > > Quicktime. Its just as hard to install the latest Flash Player plugin > > if that's the case (the newest Flash Video requires version 8 of the > > Flash plugin). If you are dealing with some sort of corporate blockage > > when it comes to installing programs, then you won't be able to > > install Flash plugin either. > > > I wouldn't have thought so, but, in spite of repeated installs of QuickTime > (in FireFox), there were some sites whose QT video I simply couldn't play - > HumanDog was one, to my great frustration. With the new 1.5 version of > Firefox it seems to be even more broken - I ran into a site recently that > crashed the browser completely if I tried to play a QT video. > > OTOH, I've never had a problem with Flash. YMMV. > > > > All in all I have no problem with Flash Video. I do think however that > > it is more often used to restrict the freedom of the viewer and > > control the experience from the point of view of the service provider > > (which may not be the same as the content creator) rather than to > > enhance the experience for the viewer. If I want to download and view > > the video later why shouldn't I be able to? If I want to put it on an > > iPod, why can't I? If I want to aggregate it with other videos so that > > I can view things in offline and skip around seemlessly, why not? > > From what I can tell, a lot more people are viewing my SWF files in whatever > aggregator than are viewing the FLV files directly on my site. So I don't > see what the problem is? > > > -- > best regards, > Deirdré Straughan > > www.beginningwithi.com (personal) > www.tvblob.com (work) > > ________________________________ > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > ________________________________ > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get Bzzzy! (real tools to help you find a job). Welcome to the Sweet Life. http://us.click.yahoo.com/KIlPFB/vlQLAA/TtwFAA/lBLqlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
