I used to work with the company behind what was then called Throttlebox, a media wrapper technology for the Entertainment Industry.
Here is a page with info that is amazingly still up:
At one point, they had contracts with several labels and put out these 'box' files for Madonna, Bowie, U2, Jim Morrison etc... 
The company went down during the early DRM Daze and also shows how difficult it is to build a sustainable business around a desktop application.  In a sense, it was a head of it's time....
But not you can do all this with Flash and Quicktime is still a viable framework too.

I know another company, Clearsand, that puts out something called MediaForge which is also a media wrapper.. ( It used to be more like Macromedia Director and I owned it back in 1997, but they adapted to changing times).  The current incarnation of their technology/community can be seen at:  http://www.mediaforge.com/

For a time, i started development on a cross-platform media wrapper using the IDE called Revolution Runtime (http://runrev.com/ ).  But my interests shifted to Open Media and not Closed DRMesque wrappers...  But wrappers can be used intuitively for Open Media too... I just dont see it worth my time when the same is achievable in with web 2.0 technology.

anyway, back to work.


On 12/28/05, LeanBackVids.com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com , Deirdre Straughan
> Geez, I leave you guys alone for a couple of days and you're STILL
> in definitions.
> I'm glad you're having fun with it, but would be comforted by a few
> statements that even though this group is called "videoblogging",
people who
> are doing things with video online that don't quite fit your definition
> (when and if you ever agree on one) are nonetheless welcome here.
> Entertaining though it is, I fear that all the nitpicking may drive away
> some people.
> So... can we make the not-quite-videobloggers feel welcome?

I'll admit the definitions can get a little annoying to read, but I
have found myself justifying the difference between many vlog-related
words lately.

However, this discussion took a theoretical and technical turn, which
I often enjoy.  Verdi mentioned the idea of using video as the primary
delivery method.  The other content, such as that found on a blog,
would be "hosted inside" the video.

Some people mentioned how this could be achieved using Quicktime, but
Flash 8 may be a much easier development platform.  Yes it will take a
financial investment and time to learn, but it can be fairly simple.

For example, build a Flash shell that took two variables - the video
file path and a text file path, which will dictate what is visible to
the user at any given time.  Using the new alpha channels in video
allows for button links on a layer above your video, and the links
could change points of time in the video or the text content file.
Making that text file a dynamic php file (or AJAX) opens up for even
more interactivity.  Once built, the only development needed would be
to make new videos and associated text.

I got discouraged by the quality of Flash video and I quit pursuing
the development of this shell.  Anybody have something similar?


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
AIDS in India: A "lurking bomb." Click and help stop AIDS now.

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"The hybrid or the meeting of two media is a moment of truth and revelation from which new form is born"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://vlogdir.com - The Videoblog Directory
http://videobloggers.org - Free Videoblog Hosting / Vlogosphere Aggregator
http://interdigitate.com - on again off again personal vlog


Reply via email to