Slashdot Mirror


Streaming Audio 10 Years Old

SlimySlimy writes "This month, streaming audio turns 10. Though first introduced by Real, streaming multimedia is so commonplace today it's hard to believe that it didn't even exist 10 years ago. In line with one of their previous press releases, RealNetworks has released a mysterious website and letter from CEO Rob Glaser celebrating 10 years of Internet streaming audio, as well as announcing a yet-to-be-revealed 'revolution' in digital media. 'On April 26, we are changing the rules of the Internet again, and digital music will never be the same.' Here is their press release from 1995 (when they were still Progressive Networks) announcing the first streaming Internet multimedia."

220 comments

  1. I know what it is.... by avdp · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's some sort of two-wheeled motorized single passenger vehicle. Oh wait...

    1. Re:I know what it is.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its streaming audio with moving pictures!

    2. Re:I know what it is.... by Lispy · · Score: 1

      Nono, it's a super powersaving CPU using software layers to emulate a x86 and it will be BIG!

  2. In other news by Scrameustache · · Score: 3, Funny



    Streaming video still buffering...

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  3. FP by peterpi · · Score: 4, Funny

    First Po

    [buffering 36%]

    1. Re:FP by Karl+Tacheron · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Har h

      [BUFFERING 8%] [BUFFERING 27%] [BUFFERING 54%] [BUFFERING 7%] [BUFFERING 98%] [BUFFERING 12%]

    2. Re:FP by game+kid · · Score: 1

      Please upgrade your Internet service.

      That your ten-byte* First Post(TM) attempt is buffering and delayed is quite a scary thing. DSL and cable are your friends.

      *or 20 depending on encoding

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    3. Re:FP by JoshRosenbaum · · Score: 1

      You must be running on the Bongo Drum transport system. ;)

    4. Re:FP by name773 · · Score: 1

      it might even be 2 bits depending who you ask

      (i don't think so, but it's a possibility that someone might)

  4. 10 years of.... evolution? by green+pizza · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Am I the only one who isn't impressed with the state of streaming media these days? I think the current RealOne player is garbage. At least the original RealAudio wasn't nearly as bad, but it still consumed a lot of RAM and CPU cycles on my 68040.

    At least VoIP and video conferencing have taken off and work quite well.

    What are some of the better one-way, RealOne-like streaming formats these days?

    1. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think the current RealOne player is garbage.
      Current RealOne? There was only one RealOne. Real released RealPlayer 8, RealOne, and then RealPlayer 10.
    2. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by nomadic · · Score: 2, Informative

      Real has always really really sucked. WMA actually streams pretty nicely I thought.

    3. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Kryxan · · Score: 1

      I am sadly dissapointed in the state of streaming content today. If it works then its clearing not the real media format. The fact is whith my broadband connection and nothing else running, nothing hogging bandwidth, streaming content still does not run well. Its like the old days on my 386 listening to a streaming audio. Seriously Real has done absolutly nothing these last 10 years to improve performance imho. I know they have gone through several codec versions that have made some minor improvments, but performance still leaves me buffering...

      Anyways its clear today that the way to go is AVI, you can create a XviD avi file with a low bitrate that downloads in a few minutes, plays for a few minutes, and still has 200% better quality than a real player stream. Which would you prefer? Download once, watch many times? Or download everytime you watch, get crappy video, audio that continuesly bounces from decent quality to crap you cant understand, and streams that cut off for no apparent reason, requiring you to start watching, and downloading, from the very beginning all over again?

    4. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      [...] but it still consumed a lot of RAM and CPU cycles on my 68040.

      On your what?? Don't you mean 80486?

    5. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by GuidoW · · Score: 1

      Please have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_68040.

      These processors can be found in Apple computers of a certain era and were the predecessors of PowerPC processors.

      --
      If it's so secret, then how come I've never heard of it?
    6. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by EvanED · · Score: 1

      WMA works well a lot of the time if you ignore the problems with it being a propriatary format. Comedy Central has some streaming clips of, say, the Daily Show that work quite nicely.

    7. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Queer+Boy · · Score: 1
      At least the original RealAudio wasn't nearly as bad, but it still consumed a lot of RAM and CPU cycles on my 68040.

      The travesty is that it's been 10 years and streaming video still LOOKS like it did on a 68040.

      --
      Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
    8. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      Ahaa... sorry, while "68000" is immediately recognizable as a Motorola processor, "4" in the number makes it look very confusing at first. Thanks.

    9. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by sffubs · · Score: 1

      Actually, RealPlayer 10 is really quite nice under Linux. It's simple, functional and has a clean GTK2 gui.

      What's more, you can watch major UK sporting events (such as the Grand National) through the BBC, using RealPlayer, in pretty good quality (not TV quality, but still definitely watchable).

      But yes, RealOne was crap.

      --
      ݼ)s$æúßðíÊ'öX'îò5^àûßQç£
    10. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have heard good things about the open-source Darwin Streaming Server.

      More info here.

    11. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      The real problem is that prices on the server end bandwidth-wise have not kept pace with prices on the consumer side.

    12. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by jschottm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think the current RealOne player is garbage.

      Could you be a little more specific? I stream terabytes of data with Real without much of a problem. The client has finally been cleared out of all of the crud - if you want a step by step guide you can read mine here and the server's finally stablized to the point that they run for months without restarting the server application.

      At least the original RealAudio wasn't nearly as bad, but it still consumed a lot of RAM and CPU cycles on my 68040.

      A 225K stream in the current version of RealPlayer takes up 7-15% of my 2.0GHz Pentium-4M that I just tested it on.

      Having worked with or investigated the three common streaming mediums, I think that Real offers the best quality for things such as Powerpoint presentations or capturing writing on a document camera. For larger (640x480) movies, I've found that QuickTime with Sorenson 3 seems a little better. However, QuickTime for Windows can be tremendously unstable and generally brings Windows down with it as well. It's also much harder than Real to get working on the client end.

      Windows Media has never impressed me much - it's a variant of MPEG4 without much going for it other than the fact it's free. When Comedy Central went from Real to Windows Media, I noticed a drop in quality, even though they went up in bandwidth.

      As far as what's being done with streaming media, I use the streaming legal music services (alternate between Napster and Real Rhapsody) and am happy with them - I've got more than enough bandwidth to use them at work and they let me listen to the stuff I don't like enough to buy but want to hear every now and then. It's helping improve education - many of the students I work for enjoy being able to review the lectures after the fact. It means we can place movies online for them to watch without them having to go to the library to watch a physical copy (that someone else may have already checked out).

    13. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      What I want to know: why are we still bothering with streaming audio when so many people have enough bandwidth to grab an hour of audio in a minute or so?

      --
      The cake is a pie
    14. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by ThJ · · Score: 1
      "Alo, Salut, sunt eu, un haiduc..."

      Time to perhaps remove this from your sig? My head is still aching from the echos...

    15. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Tab+is+on+Slashdot · · Score: 0

      you can create a XviD avi file with a low bitrate that downloads in a few minutes, plays for a few minutes, and still has 200% better quality than a real player stream You're kidding, right? Have you ever actually compared ASP MPEG-4 to Real, especially at low rates?

    16. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      2 words... live radio

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    17. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it does everything except install properly and play its own formats. Other than those faults, it's perfect!

      (Try playing some older versions of Real-formatted media and you'll see what I mean)

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    18. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by grolschie · · Score: 1

      Thanks man. I never realized that you could cancel out of the registration part. I've always hated that. One thing I hate about the installer is the intentional pause/freeze just before the option to install Google Bar. The pause makes some people click twice thinking that they have mis-clicked and the toolbar installs without them ever seeing the question.

    19. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      Live? Most of that is pre-taped.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    20. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Kryxan · · Score: 1

      yes, have you?

    21. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      numa numa yay! :D

    22. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      Actually no... I'll agree that qite a chunk of the bbc radio 4 shows are prerecorded but most of the daytime bbc radios 1,2 and 3 output is live broadcast.

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    23. Re:10 years of.... evolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I think the current RealOne player is garbage."

      Could you be a little more specific?

      I'm not that person, but I can be specific: Real Player 10 is about as reliable as my unemployed alcoholic cousin Eddie is at paying rent.

      I've tried to run Real Player 10 on Linux. Sometimes it works. Usually it does nothing -- doesn't crash, doesn't print any errors, doesn't show any windows -- just sits there doing nothing. I haven't done an exhaustive scientific study, but I see to pattern.

      (

      Granted, when it works the audio and video quality is OK. It's no Quicktime, but it's not as bad as WMV, either.

      I found some Real Audio streams I wanted to listen to last night, but apparently the Fates were not on my side, because I couldn't get RP10 to start at all. I downloaded RP8 (the ancient piece-of-crap Motif thing), and it at least *started*. (It played the video but not the audio, strangely.)

      I know the party line is that I'm supposed to be happy that they offer a Linux version at all. Well, I'm not. In my book, if the Linux version is unusably bad, that doesn't count. If I can't count on an app working when I need it, it may as well not exist.

  5. How times of changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative


    In Win95, Real Player came as standard and had no spyware or data monitoring capabilities at all, it played ra and ram files and thats all it needed to do, tip for budding software companies in there somewhere iam sure

    1. Re:How times of changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:How times of changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! Great song!

  6. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    ...does this mean "annoy-the-hell-out-of-me"-ware is now 10 years old?

    I despise RealPlayer.

    1. Re:So... by Karl+Tacheron · · Score: 1

      If you need to play RealMedia files but despise the official player, you can try the Media Player classic with the RealMedia codecs.

    2. Re:So... by vsync64 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or go get RealPlayer Enterprise. The BBC issued an ultimatum that they were going to switch away from RA unless Real offered an no-ad, no-spyware version. Cleanest multimedia player I've seen yet on Windows, and very unobtrusive.

      --
      TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
    3. Re:So... by Krellan · · Score: 1

      Wow, nice! I wish I had known about this, before I installed the normal RealPlayer....

      The audio program CarTalk issued a similar ultimatum several months ago, and that resulted in a different RealPlayer download link.

      http://www.real.com/freeplayer/?rppr=cartalk.com

      It's easier (and friendlier) to download the RealPlayer, but it results in the same spyware-infested client.
      What does it say about RealPlayer when their biggest clients are threatening to rebel, because of frustrations caused by their listeners trying to use Real's spyware-infested software? It's sad that Real is following the KaZaA "business model" by selling out to spyware.

      (Can't resist a link to my original rant about RealPlayer 8. I'm glad that version was their nadir, and they've been (slowly) improving since then.)

    4. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...only available on Windows :(

    5. Re:So... by mhbtr · · Score: 1

      because you don't have to worry about spyware on the other platforms...

    6. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im guessing you haven't used Media Player Classic
      http://guliverkli.sf.net

      or foobar2000, the music player that has the smallest
      footprint of any major music player.
      http://www.foobar2000.com/
      Or vuplayer, another very nice audio player.
      http://www.vuplayer.com/

    7. Re:So... by borud · · Score: 1
      This is too little, too late.

      Whenever I come across sites that use Real Media exclusively, I never bother to watch their video content because the last thing I need is to install Real Media's annoying ad-infested spyware. I have yet to come across something I want to see so badly that I am willing to take the risk of installing one of Real Media's players.

      Of course I am not going to trust Real Media enough to run their software. They've used up their quota and I exactly NOW is the time to do your bit to show them that they should take their users more seriously -- now that they've found that they must mend their ways. Don't fall for their quivering lower lip and the "please, we'll be good now!" act.

  7. mysterious website? by Timesprout · · Score: 1

    I thought a mysterious website was a site where no one knew the URL for it.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:mysterious website? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup for example just like.... hmm.

  8. I'm confused by smeenz · · Score: 5, Funny

    So wait.. do we hate Real or not ?

    1. Re:I'm confused by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      no no.. we have replaced Real with Apple for the next few weeks.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:I'm confused by zuvembi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, yes we do.

    3. Re:I'm confused by fm6 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Gosh, I'm so tired of self-righteous Slashdotters. Sure, they make software that's full of bugs and screws up your computer. And yeah, they claim to protect IP with technology with software, but mostly do it with lawsuits. And OK, the way they con people into buying software they don't really need is a tad dishonest. And yeah, their embeded advertising is a pain in the posterior. But nobody's perfect!

    4. Re:I'm confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We hate what they have become but honor what they were (and mourn what they should have been).

    5. Re:I'm confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THE ANSWER IS: YES

    6. Re:I'm confused by ramblin+billy · · Score: 1


      No.

      We hate the game, not the player.

      billy - word

  9. Makes ya feel... by suso · · Score: 1

    streaming multimedia is so commonplace today it's hard to believe that it didn't even exist 10 years ago.

    Actually, I find it harder to believe that it is now 10 years old. Now I feel old.

    1. Re:Makes ya feel... by antiaktiv · · Score: 1

      i have a feeling there's gonna be a lot of technologies celebrating a ten year anniversary the next couple of years.

    2. Re:Makes ya feel... by AndroidCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      It could be worse. Just think of how old you'll feel when that Punch the Monkey banner ad is 10 years old.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    3. Re:Makes ya feel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that reminds me. id love to publicly punch steve ballmer.

    4. Re:Makes ya feel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure you get a streaming video.

  10. run os x for a week by rebug · · Score: 1

    then let me know what you think of Real player.

    It's like the "I guess we better make a Mac version" edition.

    --

    there's more than one way to do me.
    1. Re:run os x for a week by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      Can't be worse than Quicktime for Windows.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  11. Solution searching for a problem? by Taladar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seriously, isn't Streaming Audio/Video just another solution searching for a problem that isn't there? Why should I use Streaming Media and suffer from bad quality, have to disable my other uses of my connection, risk having to wait for re-buffering,... when I can just download the same content in a proper format and use fast forward and rewind it, pause it,... in any way I like while watching it full screen in good quality?

    1. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because 10 years ago, most people didn't have fast connections and most people didn't have the hard drive space to store it.

      And because today, content providers often don't want you keeping a copy of their content on your hard drive.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    2. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a waste of time. People want content on-demand, not having to wait 5 hours for it to download.

    3. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Timesprout · · Score: 1

      because some people cant wait 5 days for stuff to download over their dialup

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    4. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      Seriously, isn't Streaming Audio/Video just another solution searching for a problem that isn't there? Why should I use Streaming Media and suffer from bad quality, have to disable my other uses of my connection, risk having to wait for re-buffering,... when I can just download the same content in a proper format and use fast forward and rewind it, pause it,... in any way I like while watching it full screen in good quality?

      Live broadcasts

    5. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why nobody listens to Radio or watches TV anymore.

    6. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by tommertron · · Score: 3, Insightful
      when I can just download the same content in a proper format and use fast forward and rewind it, pause it,... in any way I like while watching it full screen in good quality?

      Sounds great, unless you're listening to a live broadcast. Or something that content providers want you to listen to, but not own.

      --
      Random rants about technology: http://technorants.blogspot.com
    7. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by fingerfucker · · Score: 0

      Or something that content providers want you to listen to, but not own.

      This argument simply doesn't fly. If it arrives at your machine, it's yours. Just because you use the wrong "player" on the receving end doesn't mean you can't keep it longer. Digital data doesn't just self-destruct. For reference, see for example this (or numerous plug-ins for WinAMP doing the same thing).

    8. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by GuidoW · · Score: 1

      Streaming could be a great thing for conserving bandwidth if combined with Multicasting. This could for example enable people with rather little resources to do media-streaming. It could also make streaming of extremely popular content (like a live transmission from the olympic games for example) quite a lot less expensive.

      --
      If it's so secret, then how come I've never heard of it?
    9. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Taladar · · Score: 1

      Its not like streaming media uses some magic crappy quality=>good quality transformation algorithm. The basic rules for quality/byte are the same for both types of video. The only difference is that streaming video/audio is practically unusable if the datarate is too low while downloading is still possible and can even be resumed later after switching off the computer.

    10. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by westlake · · Score: 1
      Seriously, isn't Streaming Audio/Video just another solution searching for a problem that isn't there? Why should I use Streaming Media and suffer from bad quality, have to disable my other uses of my connection, risk having to wait for re-buffering,...

      When I get home from work, I want to wind down, relax, click on a favorite radio station, and just sit back and listen. P2P was fun, but I no longer have the time for it.

    11. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Taladar · · Score: 1

      And how many of the things using streaming media out there today are live broadcasts? Most of them could use downloadable video formats since most of them are not live. How many of the live broadcasts out there are licensed exclusively to TV stations today? About the only thing I can imagine people want to see live are some sport events that get spoiled when you know the outcome before you see it. Everything else is either better suited for text (e.g. press announcements) or can be downloaded just as well. Content providers that think streaming allows them to regain control over their content since it isn't saved to harddisk by default are the bigger supporter of streaming media and we know they just fool themselves as there is plenty of software out there to save streaming media.

    12. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Also copywrite protection.

      Windows Media prevents live capture of streaming video. In fact, some programs were forced off the net due to DMCA violation according to the website that hosted them as it broke the encryption.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    13. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by baadger · · Score: 1

      There are still many programs out there that can download video streams. CoCSoft Stream Down is one, and they work too.

    14. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by makapuf · · Score: 1

      Progressive downloads.

    15. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how many of the things using streaming media out there today are live broadcasts?

      Virtually all internet radio is live

    16. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the UK the Olympic games (up to five video + audio streams iirc) were available as live multicast streams, thanks to the BBC.

      But they were only available as IPv4 multicast, and only using Realmedia, so the only way to watch it where I am was to sit in the "room with too much multicast" (ob Simpsons reference) which is a stuffy closet, and use a laptop to tap one of the already complicated and nefarious bits of wiring...

      If it had been IPv6 multicast I'd have been able to watch it at my desk, maybe even from a comfy wireless area (multicast video is a bit shaky on lossy wireless links). I can (and have) watch the ordinary BBC channels this way, thanks to a unique hook-up run as an internal project.

    17. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      >>Why should I use Streaming Media and suffer from bad quality, have to disable my other uses of my connection, risk having to wait for re-buffering

      >That's why nobody listens to Radio or watches TV anymore.

      Your TV keeps rebuffering?

    18. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 1

      we use our pc to listen to radio all the time. Practically every radio station in the UK streams it's radio over the internet

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    19. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Zorilla · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I think the sarcasm train left the station ten minutes ago.

      --

      It would be cool if it didn't suck.
    20. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sorry, I think the sarcasm train left the station ten minutes ago.

      Apparently with your sense of humor aboard.

    21. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Live broadcasts

      Timezones

    22. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparantly you haven't watched much digital cable. I've seen it happen a couple times.

    23. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by maw · · Score: 1
      It solves [*] a real problem if you're an expat. There are things I can't watch or listen to on television or radio where I live now, particularly sporting events. I don't think many of them are even available by other, more dubious means, even if I didn't mind catching a game or a match a few days after it was played.

      [*] For a certain, very loose definition of solve. It may be ten year old technology, but it's still crap, unfortunately.

      --
      You're a suburbanite.
    24. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About the only thing I can imagine people want to see live are some sport events that get spoiled when you know the outcome before you see it

      Ah. I see you judge this to be a niche market. You are mistaken. Take a look at all the college sports related content on Yahoo Media: games, coaches shows, press conferences, teleconferences, talk shows...all broadcast live then archived. And live video, which is just coming into its own, is available for many games that are not broadcast on traditional network, cable, or satellite TV.

      While I share your distain for streaming media for preformatted content, I don't think you should dismiss streaming media as having little value.

    25. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by __aahlyu4518 · · Score: 1

      Netherlands as well... they almost all use wma streams, so I can't listen to it on my amd64 linux box without jumping through hoops to compile some audioplayer in 32bit so it can use windows codecs.
      So I don't listen... but that's ok... their sites usually contain flash as well and there is no good 64bit flash plugin for firefox.

      The newer your pc... the less things you can do... it wasn't supposed to be like this right??? ;-)

    26. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      If it takes 5 hours to download then it must be 5 hours long or more, if its any less then you wont be able to stream it anyway.. you cant stream faster than you can download. Atleast if it lasts 5 minutes but takes 5 hours to download, you can watch it eventually, you couldnt stream it for sure at that rate

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    27. Re:Solution searching for a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I record streaming audio files all the time. If you can listen to it on your computer, it's trivial to record it.

      All the "streaming" crap does is add a bunch of clicks and pops and gaps in the middle of it (even on broadband), which pisses people off. Why not just put up a low-quality MP3? You could make it sound just as bad, but without all the BUFFERING and stuff that just goes to piss off your (potential) customers.

  12. Surreal! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See you on the 26th. Sure.

  13. Please by m50d · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't criticise real, just this once. They introduced it, they were doing it over 28kbps modems (which is probably where all the buffering lines come from...it doesn't happen anymore, it didn't happen on a decent connection, what do you want them to do on a connection so slow, it's not funny), we should salute them.

    --
    I am trolling
  14. The wonders of streaming audio.... by WMD_88 · · Score: 3, Funny
    1. Re:The wonders of streaming audio.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah, I was just about to post the same picture :-)

  15. seems to just not be quite there yet, personally by cryptoz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just like cell phones and the voice encoders. They are complete crap most of the time, 'cause it's cheaper for the phone companies, even though the technology exists (and isn't all *that* expensive) to have our voices sound perfect in cell phones.

    The audio quality of streaming media can be decent, but it often is not. This appears to be for the reason that websites need to cater to those with poor connections. And sure, some sites offer multiple versions of the same thing of varying quality, but that's a minority.

    Streaming media is something that could be fantastic, but with all the lack of abiding to the standards and such, I'm not a huge fan.

  16. 10 years old? by Thuktun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wouldn't MBONE count as streaming multimedia? It predates that by three years.

    1. Re:10 years old? by BengalsUF · · Score: 1

      No, just because something is multicast does not mean it is streaming media.

    2. Re:10 years old? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't MBONE count as streaming multimedia? It predates that by three years.

      Did MBONE ever gain critical mass among residential Internet access providers?

    3. Re:10 years old? by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      Of course it does.

      But the PR of RealNetworks is just too big and too loud to allow anyone to step up and say it so that the same public audience hears. Their critical mass is not just in usage, but also in PR about streaming media.

    4. Re:10 years old? by argent · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, just because something is multicast does not mean it is streaming media.

      Do the Rolling Stones count as "media" then?

      They were the second band on the Internet, back in 1994. Live on the mbone...

    5. Re:10 years old? by BengalsUF · · Score: 1

      I never said streaming audio did not exist (on MBONE or any network) before ten years ago. It certainly did. What I was pointing out was that the parent is comparing apples and oranges. A multicast network does not exist solely for the purpose of streaming media, and streaming media does not require the use of a multicast network.

    6. Re:10 years old? by argent · · Score: 1

      A multicast network does not exist solely for the purpose of streaming media, and streaming media does not require the use of a multicast network.

      IDGI, what's your point? If people were doing streaming media over the mbone in 1993 and 1994, then Real didn't invent it and it's more than 10 years old. The mbone was designed to stream stuff in general, and one of the things that was streamed over it was audio. Lots of it.

    7. Re:10 years old? by BengalsUF · · Score: 1

      MBONE was not designed to stream stuff. It was designed to create a multicast infrastructure. Once again it's apples and oranges. Streaming does not require multicasting, and multicasting does not necessarily mean data is being streamed.

    8. Re:10 years old? by argent · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point (that is, it doesn't matter if the mbone wasn't "for streaming media", it was still an early and significant use of the mbone and it still predated Real's unicast streaming media by years.

      But not only are you missing that point, you're using an argument that makes absolutely no sense. You're arguing against points that aren't being made, and on top of that it's only correct in some kind of strict mathematic sense that's divorced from reality. For example:

      It was designed to create a multicast infrastructure.

      And what is a multicast infrastructure good for? What does it do really well, and what does it do badly? Well, what it does best is sending the same data to a bunch of different end-points at the same time. It's really good at streaming, but that's about it. Pretty much anything else it does badly because of the need for all the participants to be operating on the same schedule.

    9. Re:10 years old? by Ratbert42 · · Score: 1

      Heck, in 1993 I was doing:
      rsh otherlab 'cat /dev/audio' > /dev/audio
      on our SunOS boxes and listening to microphones.

    10. Re:10 years old? by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      No, just because something is multicast does not mean it is streaming media.

      http://myhome.hanafos.com/~soonjp/vchx.html
      "1992 Jul: MBone audio/video casts (vat/dvc), 24th IETF, Boston"

      An AV feed from a conference sounds like "streaming media" to me. CU-SeeMe was developed that same year, too.

    11. Re:10 years old? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similarly, I was listening to remote lectures over ftp around that time. (Yay sunsite: 8kB/s!)

      ftp> set binary
      ...
      ftp> get lecture.au /dev/audio

      I guess it wasn't totally live, but there wasn't much clock drift.

  17. Streaming is still not there... by RabidChicken · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I do understand that there is enormous amounts of research and new technology poured into streaming media, but I still think to end-users (and myself), streaming is still a disappointing technology. Right now, with windows media and real, it often times is a crap shoot if the media will be there when you're watching it, leading to pauses and the infamous buffering problems. Real and Windows Media are sketchy programs that seem more interested in an attractive interface than ensuring the media looks good. Sure, we can go back and forth about if more people had broadband why it would be better, but right now the crappy resolution, encoding artifacts, and sub-par audio on many streams is unacceptable/unusable.
    The best streaming I have seen is simple net-radio MPEG streams (or ogg), or apple quicktime. Apple trailers, though they take longer to buffer being such large files, tend to "guess" when to play it more accurately and are encoded like a professional video should look.
    What I simply do not understand is why more websites, if they're pushing the same amount of bits either way, don't offer the complete file for download. I know that sometimes it is streamed to prevent copying, but more often than not, streamed media is not stuff that one would not want copied (being public an all). It may even reduce strain on the server with re-viewings done locally. I think users would be much happier to wait a minute longer if they get a high-quality video/audio file and they know won't stop half way.
    It's a cool idea, but even after 10 years, its got a way to go.

    1. Re:Streaming is still not there... by howareyougentlemen · · Score: 3, Insightful
      What I simply do not understand is why more websites, if they're pushing the same amount of bits either way, don't offer the complete file for download.

      One reason is bandwidth conservation. Most people do NOT view/listen to the entire content file. With downloads, you have to dump the whole thing on them (or at least a LOT more than if you streamed).

      Not to mention having to wait for the download to complete. For -really- brief clips, sure, there is no difference. If you are having problems with streaming, the first thing to do is be sure you have set your player to TCP protocol. There are -many- factors that can screw up UDP delivery, and almost all of these will impact your perceived quality.

    2. Re:Streaming is still not there... by m50d · · Score: 1

      I've found it's pretty much the opposite of what you say. Quicktime is horrible on linux, but both real and wmv play perfectly in my browser (konqueror) with kaffeine, with no difficulty at all unless there's a stupid player detection thing. The quality looks fine, wmv gets blocky at high compression rates like jpeg but that's all. Oddly I have more difficulty with radio streams than video, none of my normal mp3 players play them reliably, and kaffeine feels like overkill.

      --
      I am trolling
    3. Re:Streaming is still not there... by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      Think about it, what do you think is more costly? Making a user download it every time? Or missing an opportunity to display an ad?

    4. Re:Streaming is still not there... by RabidChicken · · Score: 1

      You seem to be refering to hacked codecs, so any quality comparison is sort of a crap-shoot. Only real as far as I know supports native streaming. As far as radio, MPEG streaming seems to always work so long as the server is responding, what sort of radio streams do you have problem with?

    5. Re:Streaming is still not there... by ultramkancool · · Score: 0

      Ever heard of winamp? I never have buffering problems with it. Though it's interface isn't the best it "sure kicks the lamma's ass"

    6. Re:Streaming is still not there... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      Put the ad in the downloaded file.

      Problem solved.

      What costs more? 2MB of bandwidth, or a $.20 clickthru?

    7. Re:Streaming is still not there... by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      The problem is, with putting the ad in the downloaded file, there is no metrics on how many times the ad has been viewed. So the advertisers don't know if their campaign reached the number of people they hoped to. It's not cost effective to them. Unless you put some sort of usage reporting in the file format. And we all know how the majority of people over here would feel about that.

    8. Re:Streaming is still not there... by m50d · · Score: 1

      I'm using the windows code through a wine-style layer, so the quality will be as good as on windows, and as you mentioned for real I'm using straight real code. Quicktime doesn't support linux at all, and although MS doesn't either it's much easier to get wmv working (IME of course), so I favour real and wmv over Quicktime. I'm talking about shoutcast streams from anywhere, they don't work at all in arts-based players, xine/kaffeine require me to manually dig the url out of the m3u file before they'll play it, and xmms gets skippy after a while.

      --
      I am trolling
  18. Only 10 years old? by bytesmythe · · Score: 3, Informative

    How exactly are they defining "streaming audio"? Cuseeme was developed back in '93. I would consider that streaming media, and it's 12 years old.

    I still remember playing with cuseeme in the computer lab at school. The connection was painfully slow, but it was really cool to see the humble origins of this technology.

    --
    bytesmythe
    Hypocrisy is the resin that holds the plywood of society together.
    -- Scott Meyer
    1. Re:Only 10 years old? by BengalsUF · · Score: 1

      They're defining streaming audio as RealAudio. Sure, RealAudio is now ten years old, but streaming media existed much earlier than this.

    2. Re:Only 10 years old? by darkonc · · Score: 1

      I think that they should say 'COMMERCIAL' streaming video is now 10 years old.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    3. Re:Only 10 years old? by kbielefe · · Score: 1
      How exactly are they defining "streaming audio"?
      I remember reading BBS posts out loud way before that, does that count?
      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
    4. Re:Only 10 years old? by Henk+Poley · · Score: 1

      There have been even earlier programs, for a historic list see:
      http://myhome.hanafos.com/~soonjp/vchx.html

      Then there are also some that were better than RealAudio, like ECIP that used forward error correction over UDP:
      http://www.ecip.com/

  19. Harley what? by tepples · · Score: 1

    It's some sort of two-wheeled motorized single passenger vehicle.

    Harley-Davidson is an order of magnitude older than 10 years.

    1. Re:Harley what? by x_codingmonkey_x · · Score: 0
      It's some sort of two-wheeled motorized single passenger vehicle.

      Harley-Davidson is an order of magnitude older than 10 years.

      I think he was refering to this

    2. Re:Harley what? by name773 · · Score: 1

      i think tepples was joking

  20. Social Networking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just like everyone else, Real is going to try to add social network functionality to their product. They've got tons of users (which surprises me, actually) but nothing to tie them together. I don't know anyone who actually pays for a Real product, rather, they download it out of necessity to view a given media file. The other two main media players are given away by companies that have other, larger, sources of revenue (Apple, Microsoft) so Real needs a way to make people need their product and want to pay for it. They think building a type of user/content/network type of system is the solution.

  21. Stop with the Buffering crap complaints already... by howareyougentlemen · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Lifeless geeks. I haven't seen this for years. There are many good reasons to not do downloads for ephemeral content. Particularly at high simultaneous volume. And it's impossible for live content, if that concept fits into the pin-sized intellects of these congenital whingers. If you don't like all the crap bundled into the RealPlayer, then get the Helix community player, or use mplayer, which (with questionable licensing, if you care about that) plays all of the same content.

  22. not really a technology IMHO by Pflipp · · Score: 1
    Streaming media, to me, is a matter of licensing, not technology.

    If I got the option to download an audio or video clip in "256k" or "broadband", I would make the same choices as I do now with "streaming" media, and I would also let it "buffer" and then start viewing the stuff before it was completely transmitted.

    But then I would also have it
    • on disk
    . I could see it once more, check which media player supports the freaky file format, etc.

    Streaming media is the throw-away camera of the digital world.
    --
    "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
    1. Re:not really a technology IMHO by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Indeed. I remember I bought a Pay Per View stream once, and decided I wanted to see it again, so I used WMRecorder to record the stream so I could watch it whenever I wanted.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
  23. The "true" streaming pioneers (circa 1994) by gashalot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To be truthful, the first stream wasn't in 1996. It was way back in 1994, when WXYC started streaming using CuSeeMe. WREK (Georgia Tech's student radio) also started streaming with their own in-house software the same day WXYC went live, but it was not officially advertised until a later date.

    More information at: http://wxyc.org/about/first/ and http://www.wrek.org/wreknet-first.html.

    --
    -R
    1. Re:The "true" streaming pioneers (circa 1994) by 0x20 · · Score: 1

      I had thought KJHK was the first, but I guess it started just after WXYC. (December 3rd, 1994) Anyway, CUSeemee was clearly being used in substantial "webcasting" efforts long before the date claimed by Real.

    2. Re:The "true" streaming pioneers (circa 1994) by zakezuke · · Score: 5, Funny

      To be truthful, the first stream wasn't in 1996. It was way back in 1994, when WXYC started streaming using CuSeeMe. WREK (Georgia Tech's student radio) also started streaming with their own in-house software the same day WXYC went live, but it was not officially advertised until a later date.

      Note, the following is neither a troll nor a flame, but rather an accurate account my first experience with CuSeeMe circa 1994 or so.

      I remember CuSeeMe very well. I remember my brother and my self showing our mother this. The future of communication... real time video conferencing around the world for free. On an 68030 based mac we found a reflector site with a number of participants. After a few moments the first guy shows up... shirtless but no big deal. Then the second guy shows up, also shirtless. But as it turns out they were not just shirtless, they were all nakid. The 5th man showed up as just a penis and everyone said, "hi Ralf" or some such.

      We wanted to show our mother the future in communications, and there it was, the future was a bunch of nakid men.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    3. Re:The "true" streaming pioneers (circa 1994) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/nakid/naked/

    4. Re:The "true" streaming pioneers (circa 1994) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And there's been no looking back since eh?

  24. ah the irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol how funny that I just deleted Real from my computer yesterday because it was causing me problems. :)

    1. Re:ah the irony by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Dude, it's ten years old. What do you expect? Of course there is going to be problems.

    2. Re:ah the irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a coincidence, I just deleted Microsoft from my computer yesterday!

  25. Wow. by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    How much did real pay for this excelent PR on slashdot? I mean, linking directly to press releases is news now?

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      How much did real pay for this excelent PR on slashdot? I mean, linking directly to press releases is news now?

      The choices were:

      1) The press-release
      2) Another Linus/Bitkeeper Item
      3) Episode 426 of Moore's Lost Magazine
      4) Speculation that Google is seriously working on Getting Matter/Antimatter Propulsion because they hired a guy named Scottie and another one name Geordie
      5) A Blank Page

      Myself, I would have gone with #5, but there's no accounting for taste.

  26. Acacia will be happy with this thread :( by iKaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    EFF Patent Busting Project - Top 10 Most Wanted: http://www.eff.org/patent/ Acacia's July 21, 1992 patent + 1 year earlier: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,132,992.WKU.&OS=PN/5,132,992&RS =PN/5,132,992 Actually this thread topic is wrong. Streaming media is much media is older than this according to prior art submissions by the defendants.

    1. Re:Acacia will be happy with this thread :( by chachob · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of line breaks?

  27. Re:Stop with the Buffering crap complaints already by AltaMannen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't want to complain about something I never use, but I've always wanted to see live streaming video on my computer that I could somehow easily verify the transfer delay on. Is there a live video stream somewhere other than cable/satellite tv that I can view?

  28. Internet Wave by SUB7IME · · Score: 1

    I thought that Internet Wave audio had the first live streaming. Maybe it wasn't truly streaming?

  29. Actually ... by oboylet · · Score: 1

    I recently downloaded Real One Player for Mac OS X and I can personally attest to the fact that they have serious quality issues to iron out. I dl'd the player to listen to the Final Four streaming. I live in Germany and miss sports back home. While the basketball games streamed just fine, anything with video stuttered. Often I lost the connection completely and the clip started over, only to flake out again half way through. Another grievance: If you clip on any news piece from the CNN NewPass you can't just watch the video, a browser window pops up directing you to a CNN story on exactly the same topic. If I wanted to read the news I wouldn't have opened Real in the first place. What if I want to have the news on casually in the background while I check my email? I'm out of luck. I use a university connection and get pretty good (though by no means wonderful) performance. By all accounts, I should be able to stream video with no trouble. It might be that RealPlayer had trouble with my proxy. It might be that I'm an international user. I'm not sure why either of these facts should be issues in the age of broadband. I should be one of Real's target niche customers. Hell, Glaser once said in an email that he started the sports ____Pass service because he was tired of missing home baseball games. A final complaint: When I tried to cancel the service I was told to call a 1-888 number. As an international customer this didn't make sense. Why should I have to pay to make a call to cancel a free trial? Their online help was nearly useless, and I had to submit a question with their email support twice before the service was canceled. Even if the engineering department were not the real of old (alas, nothing's changed), their marketing folks are still swine. I rest my case.

    1. Re:Actually ... by Moderator · · Score: 0

      RealOne Player is at least a few years old. Even on my FreeBSD box I have RealPlayer 10 installed.

      --
      The World is Yours.
  30. RadioRipper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And thanks to tools like RadioRipper http://www.radioripper.net/ and StreamRipper http://www.streamripper.sourceforge.net/, I have a perfect record of all that has been streaming audio!

  31. 10 years of streaming at WXYC by MacJedi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    WXYC, the first radio station to stream over the internet, is offering a free CD for download to celebrate their own 10-years-of-streaming anniversary. (Be a good citizen and use the torrent.)

    --
    2^5
    1. Re:10 years of streaming at WXYC by cianduffy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sorry to piss on the parade here, but XFM, then Alices Resturant, were streaming on the web in 1992

      13 years ago.

      http://www.xfmdublin.com/

      Now, who the hell *listened* to them, I dunno; as I was unable to get a decent net connection in this city till 2004..

      I also doubt they were the first, but it proves WXYC *weren't* the first.

    2. Re:10 years of streaming at WXYC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe they had a *web page* in '92, but were they actually *streaming* ?

    3. Re:10 years of streaming at WXYC by cianduffy · · Score: 1

      from extremely rusty memory, yes. Definately they were by 1994 (which is when I can first remember listening to them), which is still more than ten years ago

  32. hard to believe? by MartinG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it's hard to believe that it didn't even exist 10 years ago.

    Is it?

    Even when you think that 10 years ago Microsoft Internet Explorer didn't exist and 15 years ago the world wide web had only just been invented?

    --
    -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
    1. Re:hard to believe? by alfrin · · Score: 1

      Even when you think that 10 years ago Microsoft Internet Explorer didn't exist Good times....
      Anyways, Streaming Audio can seem rather young compared to somethings.
      But when you use it almost everyday it becomes something we think of as just there,
      then you forget that it is relatively new technology

  33. my DSL must suck, then ... by Heisenbug · · Score: 5, Informative

    They introduced it, they were doing it over 28kbps modems (which is probably where all the buffering lines come from ...

    No. I have DSL. If I go try to watch, say, the Daily Show on Real or WMP, I expect that about half the time I'll have pauses or drops in quality or whatever because of connection issues. If I go to watch, say, a movie trailer in Quicktime, it downloads as fast as possible, shows me how much is downloaded, lets me start when I think I'll be able to see the whole thing, and lets me pause and jump around within everything already loaded without lag if I want to see something again or wait until the rest is loaded.

    All of the cracks about Real come because the model of only giving you the data *right* when you need it is simply inferior to the model of giving you all the data at once. It's another example of rights holders crippling their own damn product in a hopeless attempt to prevent you from downloading it and showing it to your friends.

    If web sites are using realtime streaming to show live content, then fair enough -- I don't blame Real if the connection gets slow. If they're using realtime streaming to show short pre-recorded clips that could easily fit in a RAM buffer, then they deserve ridicule for doing it, and Real deserves ridicule for encouraging it.

    1. Re:my DSL must suck, then ... by GarfBond · · Score: 4, Informative
      Then you haven't used a modern version of RealPlayer recently. RealPlayer 10 does exactly just what you describe: precache the file if your connection can handle it while it's playing. I've even noticed WMP10 doing this not too long ago, so this feature is not unique to QT.

      At least on Windows, here's how you enable it:

      • Tools>Preferences
      • General|Playback Settings
      • Cache on-demand streams for faster seeking and smoother playback
      Next time you're playing a file, you should notice a little green bar scrolling across the progress bar, indicating how far ahead you've cached the file. I don't know if this requires the special Helix server to do this, but I don't think so since it does it on basically every file I've played. The windows media-equivalent might require the server use the WM Server though, since this isn't something I've seen happen too often. If you want to eliminate the "buffering" syndrome, you might want to turn on TurboPlay too, which is in the same panel as the cache setting. I have no idea if either of these are turned on by default (but they probably should be).
    2. Re:my DSL must suck, then ... by Heisenbug · · Score: 1

      Indeed, you're right -- I haven't checked that particular preferences panel recently. If it works, it'll definitely make my browsing experience better.

    3. Re:my DSL must suck, then ... by jschottm · · Score: 1

      If they're using realtime streaming to show short pre-recorded clips that could easily fit in a RAM buffer, then they deserve ridicule for doing it

      I work in streaming media - my average file is around 80 minutes long. The files range from around 180-500MB. Is that a good enough use for you?

      Real deserves ridicule for encouraging it.

      I don't believe that any of the Real manuals that I've read include encouragement to show short clips via streaming.

      It's another example of rights holders crippling their own damn product in a hopeless attempt to prevent you from downloading it and showing it to your friends.

      So? The general public has shown itself to be inherently untrustworthy when it comes to digital media. Content costs money to create. There has to be some way to recoup that money.

    4. Re:my DSL must suck, then ... by SewersOfRivendell · · Score: 1
      At least on Windows, here's how you enable it:

      Enable it? Why isn't intelligent behavior the default?

  34. Timing -- iTMS is 2 years old on the 28th by oboylet · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Sure, this the 10-year aniversary of RealPlayer doing streaming or whatever, but it was 2 years ago (4.28.03 I think) that Apple opened the iTMS for business.

    I see a Press Release flame war ensuing, touting the million or so subscribers that Real claims to have vs whatever million number of songs iTMS has served up.

    Also, Real might be launching some new digital music service to take the steam out of Jobs's crowing over his pet project.

    Just a thought.

  35. Here's to Streaming Porn by Excen · · Score: 1

    or, as I like to call it, /.TV.

    --
    "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
    1. Re:Here's to Streaming Porn by fishmasta · · Score: 1

      Actually, I picture /.TV to be more like obese bearded nerds and 14 year old h4xX0r5!!!one! furiously typing "Windows SUX!!!" 24 hours a day.

  36. 1993 is more than 10 years ago... by argent · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Back in June 1993 when HTML was more common in alphabet soup and the MBone, or the Multicast Backbone, was another technical novelty, STD was the first band to perform live on the Internet."

  37. Do this by gdegnbol · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:Do this by vikman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Glad to see this fixed. Please send any other questions or concerns you might have with the RealPlayer for Mac to macplayer@real.com

      --
      --
    2. Re:Do this by grazzy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the problem with realplayer was solved with realplayer alternative.

      No more spyware, advertising, crappy "traybarprograms" clogging your system. No more autostart. No more shit. Just a codec that plays the fc*** files in the player of your choice.

      Thanks for that. Have a good evening.

    3. Re:Do this by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      Thanks for all the great products you guys make! Ignore the unconstrictive criticism on Slashdot, alot of these folks haven't used the product in quite some time. I really appreciate it all and am currently playing around with helix server to set up a small stream from my dsl connection. Although documentation (or a nice gui for linux) could be a bit a better for noobs like myself ;) or maybe i'm just looking in the wrong places.
      Regards,
      Steve

    4. Re:Do this by vikman · · Score: 1

      Thank you :-) It has been fashionable to diss everything related to Real on Slashdot. Over the last two years though, I have seen a change in the perception - a just reward for the hardwork by the teams (be it the Mac player, or the new better-behaved windows player and of course the linux player) and the commitment shown by management to these efforts.
      I am very much for calling a spade a spade, especially when it comes to pointing out what we could do better. Having a simple GUI to setup the helix server would be nice - might be a good project to propose on the helix community? http://www.helixcommunity.org

      --
      --
    5. Re:Do this by hendridm · · Score: 2, Informative
      No more spyware, advertising, crappy "traybarprograms" clogging your system.

      Or you could download RealPlayer Enterprise.

    6. Re:Do this by mhbtr · · Score: 1

      I have to agree. The new Mac Player rocks and is one of the best media players around. I love that it uses the Safari rendering engine for the built in browser and has great on screen controls. I just wish you have Mac support for Rhapsody - the mac needs a subscription audio service as well...

  38. Internet Radio still sucks by mfnickster · · Score: 1

    Why can't they seem to get it right, after all this time? It should work like a real radio. You type in the address of the station, and you hear the streaming audio. No mucking about with settings.

    Instead, we get redirected to web pages full of ads, pop-ups asking us what proprietary format we can listen to ("don't you know?") and reminders that we could hear the bleeding music if we just "upgrade" by shelling out $4.95 a month.

    It's no surprise that Internet radio hasn't taken off, really. :-/

    - MFN

    --
    "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    1. Re:Internet Radio still sucks by shish · · Score: 2, Informative
      It should work like a real radio. You type in the address of the station, and you hear the streaming audio. No mucking about with settings.

      Get thee to shoutcast. Admittedly it's a search engine rather than a frequency dial, but IMHO that's an improvement. As I type there's 9163 stations to choose from, and once you've found something you like it is just a case to taking a note of it's URL to type in later (or use bookmarks...)

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
  39. 10 years? so what by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 2
    I'm sorry.....but this is obviously nothing more than a cheap press release by Real. So what if streaming video is 10 years old. Big whoop. Can anybody tell me why this anniversary is newsworthy?

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  40. stationripper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i personally find stationripper to be the best i've seen to record streams. at least shoutcast. and the pod cast thing is cool

  41. SpeakFreely anyone? by necromcr · · Score: 0

    This thing was around also just around that and it's page say it was first announced in 1991. It actually worked over 14.4kbps modem.

    --
    No more I say.
  42. There is no DRM by argent · · Score: 1

    Or something that content providers want you to listen to, but not own.

    If you can hear it, you can record it. Streaming media is no more secure than any other DRM-protected audio... that is, not protected at all.

    1. Re:There is no DRM by tommertron · · Score: 1

      that is, not protected at all Maybe not for you or me, but the average user has no idea how to record or rip streamed audio. Just like DVDs can be copied and burned, but not by the average user - it's still an obstacle.

      --
      Random rants about technology: http://technorants.blogspot.com
    2. Re:There is no DRM by argent · · Score: 1

      Maybe not for you or me, but the average user has no idea how to record or rip streamed audio.

      In other words DRM only provides protection against people who are not normally interested in abusing the video stream that are protected by it.

    3. Re:There is no DRM by tommertron · · Score: 1

      In other words DRM only provides protection against people who are not normally interested in abusing the video stream that are protected by it. Umm... then who were all those people sharing music on the P2Ps? Or making copies of CDs, and before that, tapes? A lot of people are interested in it, but the easier it is to do, the more people there are who are going to copy content.

      --
      Random rants about technology: http://technorants.blogspot.com
    4. Re:There is no DRM by argent · · Score: 1

      then who were all those people sharing music on the P2Ps? Or making copies of CDs , and before that, tapes?

      Tell me, who is this person who can figure out how to make a copy of a tape but can't figure out how to plug that 3.5mm jack into the back of the computer instead of the back of the casette player?

    5. Re:There is no DRM by cos(0) · · Score: 1

      My mother, my father, and probably anyone over the age of 40. Audio tape recording has been made simple and obvious: there are two decks, one of them has a Record button right by the Play button. Most people, though, would be surprised to discover that a sound card can actually accept sound!

    6. Re:There is no DRM by argent · · Score: 1

      My mother, my father, and probably anyone over the age of 40.

      Ah, and these are the people who are passing music around on the P2P networks? But never mind that...

      Audio tape recording has been made simple and obvious: there are two decks, one of them has a Record button right by the Play button. Most people, though, would be surprised to discover that a sound card can actually accept sound!

      Where did I say anything about the sound card being an input device? They were recording stuff to tape, what's stopping them from recording this stuff to tape. I know people like that are recording FM radio to tape, because MY Mom and Dad have sent me enough of the results... this is basically the same thing.

  43. streaming internet beer? by swatikiss · · Score: 1

    free beer?

    1. Re:streaming internet beer? by 50m31sl4sh. · · Score: 0

      Yeah, as in speech.

      --
      Rediculous is ridiculous!
  44. No need for buffering with ... by Tandoori+Haggis · · Score: 1

    Shoutcast and XMMS. There are quite a few channels to choose from and in some cases the quality is pretty good. http://shoutcast.com/

    I set up shortcuts to the audio feeds I want, which launch XMMS to play the audio stream.

    OTH live or recorded video streams (usually real) to suffer from buffering and lack of any standardisation.

    If they cant be bothered to impliment a sensible solution, I can't be bothered to waste my time on them.

    --
    My hyperlinks aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
  45. I reversed-engineered this by Hieronymus+Howard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At the time that this was released, I was working on a project for streaming audio and video over fibre networks for a Imperial College in London (which is Britains top tech university). I downloaded the real player client and reverse engineered the protocol. To test it, I also downloaded a REM track off the net in .mp2 format. Yes, mp2 not mp3. This probably made me one of the first illegal music downloaders on the net. I wrote streaming software for DEC Alpha unix boxes and got thoroughly sick of hearing "Losing my religion" over and over and over again.

    1. Re:I reversed-engineered this by Tab+is+on+Slashdot · · Score: 0

      This probably made me one of the first illegal music downloaders on the net.

      I've reported you to AOL.

    2. Re:I reversed-engineered this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also reverse engineered the Real Player stream, here is the pseudo-code:

      if (random>50) {
      streamdata(bytes);
      } else {
      rebuffer();

      }

    3. Re:I reversed-engineered this by McFadden · · Score: 1

      Bah! I was downloading files to my Sun 3/80 before you were in long trousers sonny. Funnily enough I seem to recall most of my time at university was spent hacking (without much difficulty due to the lousy security) the internet gateway for Imperial College (apparently Britains top tech university) so that we could play Swedish MUDs.

  46. I stream Happy Birthday... by Ogman · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd stream "Happy Birthday" in celebration but, thanks to extensions of copyright law and overly agressive enforcement, I'd probably be arrested or sued before the candles were blown out!

    --
    But Officer, I DID read the f**king article!
  47. April 24, 1995... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    April 24, 1995: Real introduces streaming audio, allowing web surfers to listen to halting bursts of static in real-time.

  48. I stopped reading the letter... by WRoach · · Score: 1

    when I saw "it's not an elite club"...

  49. Here's my bet on what it is... by GarfBond · · Score: 3, Interesting
    You'll notice that Rhapsody (a very very nice subscription music service, albeit somewhat ugly) and RealPlayer music store are two completely separate programs, and that a subscription in one does not indicate a purchase in the other. I bet this is what their announcement is going to indicate.

    Back in 2004 there was this little noticed press release on their website: REALNETWORKS MERGES REALPLAYER AND MUSIC SERVICES TEAMS INTO SINGLE BUSINESS UNIT. I bet what they're announcing tomorrow is the fruits of their labor, a single program that combines the single-track buy idea with the subscription music idea, into one program and hopefully does it well. Napster does it now, but their subscription program has so many different restrictions on it it's really annoying (eg "buy track only" or "buy album only" and such).

    Obviously the "digital music revolution" thing is a lot of hype, but a combined program would be far more effective than what they've got now, so long as it works well and isn't bloated to hell. Also, it'd be nice if they took this opportunity to upgrade the audio quality on the Rhapsody stream files to something like 160 or 192 AAC/RA10 instead of the 128WMA they use right now (the actual pay per track music store uses 192 AAC)

  50. ftp foo.au /dev/audio by camk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember back in the day before anyone knew what a URL was, we'd ftp .au files from wustl and pipe it to /dev/audio on our sparcstations instead of saving it to disk (my univiersity acct had like a 1mb quota back then) streaming audio has never been easier than that

  51. very interresting license agreement they have by phsdv · · Score: 1
    from their linux 10.0.3-r1 license agreement:

    By clicking on or accepting the "ACCEPT" option below, or by installing, copying or otherwise using the Software, you agree to be bound by the terms of this License Agreement. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT, CLICK THE "ACCEPT" BUTTON AND/OR DO NOT INSTALL THE SOFTWARE.

    so if you do NOT agree you have to click ACCEPT???? Is this why we love them...

  52. Bittorrent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    eh?

  53. Not enough by Max_Wells_SH · · Score: 1

    How much did real pay for this excelent PR on slashdot? I mean, linking directly to press releases is news now?

    Judging by the comments, not nearly enough. But just wait a bit, the rest should be coming through soon. Yeah, I had to make my own buffering joke too.

    --
    I read Slashdot for the articles.
  54. Multicasting by hey · · Score: 1

    Someday we'll get multicasting and streaming will actually work.

    1. Re:Multicasting by howareyougentlemen · · Score: 1
      Multicasting has been a commercial reality since 1920. It's called audio and video transmission via modulation of an RF carrier.

      IP multicasting is still nonexistent except in carefully prepared networks. The Real Server & Real Player have done multicast for something like 8 years. It's just that very few networks are actually multicast-clean.

    2. Re:Multicasting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IPV6 biotch!!!

  55. streaming mp3 by MikeyG79 · · Score: 0

    Gotta thank the guys from VTC for pounding out streaming MP3s around '97
    WVTC

  56. Symbian P800 streaming recieve by jago25_98 · · Score: 1

    Probably totally offtopic but what the hey,

    anyone know how I can listen to streaming mp3 with my SonyEriccson P800?

    1. Re:Symbian P800 streaming recieve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phone Dell and buy a computer :P

  57. Re:Stop with the Buffering crap complaints already by bit+trollent · · Score: 1

    c-span

    The live feeds allow you to compare Real Video and Windows Media Player side by side. I have personally always preffered WMP.

  58. Re:Stop with the Buffering crap complaints already by howareyougentlemen · · Score: 1

    transfer delay? Other than broadcasting horse racing or other ultra-time-sensitive material, this is irrelevant. Conventional streaming is always going to be some small amount of delayed, due to the various elements in the content creation & distribution chain (typically three computers, before it gets to yours, sometimes more).

  59. Article text in case of buffering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear RealPlayer User,

    This week marks the 10th anniversary of our introduction of RealAudio®, the product that started the Internet multimedia revolution. I'm writing to thank you for letting us be a part of your life for these past 10 years.

    As one of over buffering... 450 million Internet users around the world who has used the RealAudio Player, or its successor, buffering... the RealPlayer®, you are part of something very big. But at the same time, it's not buffering... an elite club. Indeed, one of the reasons we invented Internet streaming was to create an audio visual medium that was and is open to everyone -- no channel capacity limits, no buffering... gatekeepers, just personal choice.

    Along the way there have been buffering... lots of twists and turns: A technology financial bubble in the late 1990s. The bursting of that bubble five years ago. The incredible buffering... worldwide growth of broadband. The explosion of peer-to-peer services that were buffering... based on very innovative technology but often were used to distribute video and audio without the permission of the rights holders. The more recent growth of services that delivered buffering... that same content, particularly music, in a way that is both great for consumers and respectful of the rights of the artists who created it.

    Over the past buffering... 10 years buffering... we've delivered 10 major versions of the RealPlayer, compelling new products such as RealJukebox® -- the buffering... Internet's first integrated music jukebox and Rhapsody(TM) -- the Internet's first music buffering... service with music from all of the major labels.

    While we're proud of our buffering... past, I'm also writing to tell you that the best truly is yet to come. We're as committed to innovation over the next 10 years as buffering... we have been for our first 10 years. I know this sounds like an ambitious buffering... statement, but we've got some stuff coming very soon that I think you will agree is truly a buffering... breakthrough.

    On April 26, we are buffering... changing the rules of the Internet again, and digital music will never be the same. I can't say more buffering... now, but I do encourage you to visit www.real.com on the 26th to learn more. If you'd like to sign up to be automatically buffering... notified, click here.

    Again, on behalf of buffering... everyone here at RealNetworks, I want to thank you for making our first ten years so buffering... remarkable, and I want to promise you that you ain't heard nothin' yet.

    buffering... Sincerely Yours,
    Rob buffering... Glaser
    Rob Glaser
    Founder & CEO, RealNetworks buffering... , Inc.
    buffering... buffering... buffering...

  60. Penicillin won't cure it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You try to so hard be careful, but in one lousy fleeting instance of drunken madness you drop your guard and zap! - it infects your system. No matter what remedy you try you can't get totally rid of it and it keeps coming back every so often just to remind you of you momentary lapse of reason.

  61. i for one am boycotting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will not be viewing the forementioned web site because I do not wish to dig through confusing legal texts to find the link to view the free site. I assume that you have to pay to view their better memorial.

  62. That's strange. by bratmobile · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used streaming audio over IP in 1992. But 2005 - 1992 > 10. What's wrong here??

    Streaming audio has been around a LOT, LOT longer than ten years. Commercial streaming audio, maybe. But the idea -- and mature, working implementations -- have been around for far longer.

    Anyone else here use Speak Freely on NeXStep? I still fondly remember being the weirdo in the lab who was "talking to his computer" -- actually, talking to a guy in a different city over voice over IP. That was in 1994, and it even had support for encryption. Not to mention all of the work on MBONE.

    Other streaming audio apps existed long before that, too.

  63. Internal stat of realplayer downloads by krelian · · Score: 1

    Before contract with BBC 1%
    After contract with BBC 99%

    I just can't see any other use for this player.
    Thank god for real alternative

  64. "Invention" by ShagratTheTitleless · · Score: 1, Informative
    streaming multimedia is so commonplace today it's hard to believe that it didn't even exist 10 years ago

    My television begs to differ!

    --
    Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
  65. In Other News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Michael Jackson loves Streaming Audio...

  66. Revolution by labratuk · · Score: 1

    ...as well as announcing a yet-to-be-revealed 'revolution' in digital media.'On April 26, we are changing the rules of the Internet again, and digital music will never be the same.'

    Will it finish buffering?

    --
    Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
  67. NAS is older than that. by AReilly · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm pretty sure that I remember setting up NAS to stream audio to X terminals in the early '90s.

    --
    -- Andrew
  68. Real Rhapsody 3.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone notice Real released Rhapsody 3.0 to Comcast ONLY members back in Jan/Feb. It's fairly final'ish, but is for the most part complete. I've been using it for 4 weeks. It allows customer's to download songs in 160kbps WMA (digitally right's managed of course and only avail to WinXP users), to stream, to authorize 3 machines, to purchase RealMusic Store files (in RealAudio AAC @ 192kbps) for $0.89 for subscribers, to import MP3, RA, WMA, WAV and CDA, and to re-download all music store purchases within the 3 authorized machines. Oh and did I mention that it does include Harmony, the best software ever created for my iPod. It's listed on their website for Rhapsody 3.0 here @ http://service.real.com/rhapsody/

  69. Re:Stop with the Buffering crap complaints already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Questionable licensing...

    No, not at all. MPlayer and other players that use MPEG fall foul of US patents. However, unlike copyright, you must patent in each country as your patent is only good in the country you applied for and granted in. As Europe has not allowed software and algorithms patents this was not a problem for Xine, Mplayer, VideoLan, ect as they are developed outside of the US!!!

    When these players were developed there were no Patents in the countries they were developed in and hence were legal- I think Europe also has a prior use cause in its patent law as they are first to file not first to invent so even if they foolishly pass the software patent directive they may actually continue to use the technology.

    -Now I remember when Real made its debut. connection speeds tended to be around 10Kbs-28Kbs and at those speeds video was a BIG deal. I remember the JenniCam show which streamed using Real player in 1995-1996.

    -Also Real player 10 for Linux/Unix (Helix Player with Real Plugins to play RPM, RAM, RM) is very well behaved. It is actually a fairly good player and it has an installer. Say what you want about Real but outside of FOSS media players, REAL is the only one who has made a player for Windows, Mac, and Unix/Linux

  70. And Real, at least under Linux, bites it by whitroth · · Score: 1

    For me, it's either Real or mplayer. The latter almost *never* gags. Real, numerous times a day, pauses itself, half the time will not pick up, or it just stops.

    Wish I could get mplayer to do *all* Windows media sites, so I could forget no-so-Real.

    mark

  71. Streaming? What does it really mean? by default+luser · · Score: 1

    In all my years of using Real Media, I've never seen it do the one thing I would expect streaming media would want to acheive:

    Graceful degredation with reduction in average bandwidth.

    Real Player, with it's buffer, accounts for the temporary peaks and troughs (short downloads...say, a page load) in your available bandwidth. But when you have long-term changes in your available bandwidth, Real Player can't cope because it requires a fixed minimum bandwidth for the stream. What typically happens is audio is retained and frames are garbled for LONG periods while it "resyncs".

    It's as if Real didn't even stop to think about the very system they were creating. If multiple people are streaming or downloading large files on the same connection and overload each other's bandwidth needs, you're going to have annoying buffering pauses. Similarly, if a streaming server serves more requests than available bandwidth, it won't be able to serve out the stream fast enough, but it will still stupidly attempt to.

    Most sites already have 2 or 3 versions of a particular stream (56k, ISDN, broadband). For a live stream, there is no excuse why a 300k stream couldn't be dropped down to 100k (or 100k down to 56k) temporarily until connection improves, since all three streams are simultaneously available and could easily be synchronized. And for non-live streams, why not give media providers the ability to create two or three levels of streaming quality that can easily be linked and used in a similar manner for on-demand streaming?

    That would be the end of the "Buffering..." stigma. But I have never seen ANYONE implement such a concept.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  72. Hey we had streaming video at Sun Micro in 1991! by John+Sokol · · Score: 1

    We did 13,000 viewers across the internet in 1991 to Sun Microsystems employiees.

    Also my livecam technology (formerly at livecam.com) was going since 1994 with AUDIO!!!!

    Even the Xing Streamworks product with Audio and video beat the real audio stuff out to the market!!!

    --
    I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso