My, How Far Flash Video Has Come

For the few people out there still questioning the validity of Flash video as the best, if not only, solution for the web, you have to watch this. Make sure to click the ‘Maximize’ button in the top-left corner in order to see what I mean. Flash applications built in Actionscript 3 allow for a fullscreen mode – allowing things such as video to be viewed in a much more traditional, theatrical manner. Surprisingly high-quality video can now be easily viewed over the web with no server-side streaming software – allowing anyone with ample bandwidth to provide video to its audience.

This ability for rich media experiences to be delivered on the cheap is one more reason that: 1) Flash (or perhaps another future rich media delivery system) is going to become an even more integral part of the web/browser experience, and, 2) The TV, in its current form, is becoming more obsolete by the day. We all saw this coming, I am just utterly blown away at the pace that it is occurring. If you thought the public liked web video before, just wait until the next batch of video players to hit the scene that take advantage of all the features Flash 9/Actionscript 3 have to offer. It will make the current phenomenon look pitiful in comparison.

Via Flex RIA

12 thoughts on “My, How Far Flash Video Has Come”

  1. Wow! Maybe it is time to expand my skills and dive into this. I was already thinking about throwing out my TV. This will make that decision a lot easier.

  2. Flash/Actionscript is quite enjoyable to work with and I highly suggest anyone publishing on the web to give it a go. Video in Flash is one of my greater interests – I built the video players for a couple relatively large online video sites (Current TV and TED).

    I think my deep interest in online video makes my desire for a TV basically nil. I have not lived with a TV for the last four years and I really feel like my life is better for it.

  3. I doubt the TV will become obsolete any time soon. Watching video online might be popular in college dorms and it bedrooms, but the living room TV isn’t going away any time soon.

    Things like Tivo/Amazon Unbox, AppleTV, Vugu will take that technology and put it onto the TV. Essentially, people want to watch TV comfortably, with friends. That just doesn’t happen with your PC.

  4. FF – Nice find man – thanks for the link.

    Kevin – TV is still a home staple, but I wouldn’t be too sure about its complete dominance in the future. Ratings are down pretty much across the board. In addition, I am very skeptical that the interactive features people are coming to enjoy are going to be possible with a remote and at a 10 foot distance. I personally could see a laptop or media device docking feature for TV’s.

    Still, as it stands, the TV is obsolete – really that is all I was alluding to. I personally feel traditional TV watching will go down in the future in favor of a more interactive experience that can be found with more portable and multi-purposed devices. I guess we’ll see. 🙂

  5. Maybe the two will merge a bit. I’m almost always behind a computer screen so I was thinking about just putting one big screen in the living room to which I can connect (wireless) my notebooks. Then whenever you’d like to see a movie, you cn enjoy it comfortably.

  6. Yeah, I think you’re right matthijs – there will probably be a meeting of the minds between the two. I have to say, I am openly rooting for the demise of the TV. The passive consumption of media/information just seems so 20th century and has proven to be detrimental to society in many ways. I would love to see the couch potato become extinct.

  7. I guess I’m just sceptical that the TV will go away based on what’s happened in the past.

    – When radio came along it was said that newspapers would die.
    – When TV came along it was said that radio would die.
    – When the internet came along it was said everything would die.

    But the truth has been been that the media has evolved and changed overtime.

    I agree that certain interactive experiences will be online, but if you think about how people really interactact with TV, it’s mostly passive and that’s important. If I’m watching a TV show or a film, I don’t want it to be an interactive story, I just want to be entertained and that’s the same way with other people. Digital TV in the UK & Ireland has added interactive features, but it’s on your TV, not separate from it and merely ads an extra layer and it’s mainly to TV and sports, because ultimately people want to be told a good story.

    TV will not die, but it will change. This like video on demand, online rentals as well as TV on your computer will happen, but I’d be shocked if a PC, with all it’s settings and fiddling would ever replace, the nice, clean simplicity of watching TV with a remote in your living room.

    Regarding couch potatoes, maybe stuff like Tivo and Apple TV will mean people watch specific TV shows rather than just turning on the TV an watching broadcast TV. I definitely think the idea of channels has the potential to change. For me anyway that’s a dream. I too don’t have a TV in my house but still watch films and TV shows I download. I’d get a TV again in a second if I could have watch TV without broadcast channels.

    If you’re interested in this type of debate I highly recommend the book The Victorian Internet, which highlights the rise of the Telegraph. It’s a fascinating read.
    http://www.amazon.com/Victorian-Internet-Tom-Standage/dp/0425171698

  8. The only thing I would say towards that argument is that each of those mediums had a fatal flaw that allowed the other to stay around. TV, while arguably having the most pull towards audiences, is horrible for reading and its traditional model is not portable. Print was able to stay around this long because of the depth that it allowed for stories and news pieces – something that TV and radio could not compete with. Radio had claws because of its extreme portability and its ability to be played in cars.

    The internet medium can (theoretically) do everything TV, radio and print do plus more. There will need to be some improvements in home bandwidth in certain countries (most notably the US) but video, audio over the web are coming along very quickly. Print is all but dead at this point due to what can be done over the web – newspaper subscriptions are plummeting right now. The abstract notion of TV will always be around, but I believe it will be driven through the internet and it will (for many) not be a 10 foot experience. As laptops improve in their display technologies, I honestly feel they will be that happy medium that will fill the needs for 80% of the population in terms of media and content consumption. Just like the iPod has become the go-to device for audio instead of the large, expensive stereo systems, the same will be the case for consuming video.

    The other reason why I feel TV in 10 or 15 years will not look much like TV today is that our generation and younger want more interaction. Less and less people are simply not interested in sitting down and idly watching about a 2-to-1 ratio of content to advertisements with no personal interaction whatsoever. TV is going to have to change dramatically to keep up with the innovation on the internet and it is going to cost them a whole lot of money to do so.

  9. Thanks for very interesting article dude:) btw. I really enjoyed reading all of your posts. It’s interesting to read ideas, and observations from someone else’s point of view… makes you think more. So please keep up the great work. Greetings

  10. I think that alot of people reading the content on Your site but only small numer of them write them (I think they don’t have time to do it). btw. I update my gravatar maybe it works now. Greetings

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *