Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : RealNetworks (NASDAQ:RNWK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Roger Bass who wrote (2966)	4/29/1999 1:03:00 AM
From: soup	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5843

>First, an assertion: most of the streaming video on the web in future will be served from (a) major 'broadcast' portals and (b) large scale media hosting services, ie services offering an easy way for small providers to get into streaming media.< I question the assertion that most of streaming media will take this form and suggest a third model: (c) small providers purchasing their own servers in order to get into streaming media. [Note: We also get into the problem of defining "most" -- if you mean most of the "stream-ees", then it's good for RNWK's "pay-per-view" business model. However, if you mean most of the "stream-ers" then it's good for AAPL's "thousand points of light" business model.] But assuming you're correct that (a) and (b) will comprise 80% (?) of the market, then (c) still would still represent a huge and lucrative share (however defined). >Delivering reasonable quality of service for larger (and spiky) audiences requires the ability to actively manage loads for multiple video streams across multiple servers. Most small and medium sized web media players will have less hassle and deliver a better quality experience using such a service. Again it depends on how you define "small and medium". AAPL specsheet claims a single OSX Server sufficient to serve 250 separate QT streams to 1000 users simultaneously. >1. Does Apple have any customers at all for their hardware in these kinds of large scale media-server facilities?< AFAIK, AAPL has no hardware offering currently meeting that criterion. But I should also point out that WebObjects -- AAPL's "platform for developing and deploying Internet, intranet, extranet and e-commerce applications" -- has a substantial corporate following including: "American Automobile Association, America Online, Nation's Bank, Fannie Mae, GTE, Nortel Networks—as well as the Walt Disney Company's ESPN, Disney Store Online, Disney Travel, Disney Pooh Grams and Family.com": apple.com apple.com I can see no reason why AAPL can't leverage these userbase to advance QT-based streaming solutions. >2. Is there any realistic reason to believe that they will gain share in this hardware market?< This year, AAPL will introduce G4 processors utilizing Motorola's Altivec enhancements. Soft/hardware revisions will enable symmetrical multi processing CPUs. IMO, advances in processing power, storage and data compression will allow larger groups of end users to be served by cheaper hard and software bundles. Seminars/discussions with marketing reps indicate that AAPL will be making steady efforts to position itself in the enterprise market. To this end AAPL is currently co-sponsoring with Kinko's a series of simulcasted small business seminars . >3. For Unix or NT based facilities, given that those facilities need to support Real, with the client base that's out there, is the business case to support adding QT4?< Real charges content providers for every user. Beyond the initial cost of implementation, QT will cost them nothing. AAPL claims 8 million downloaded QT3/4 for the StarWars trailer. Millions more will download it in order to access the "micro-streamers". This in addtion to the (25) million Mac users who have QT already bundled with their OS. And despite the QT-bashing on this thread, I ask anyone to point out a Real/MediaPlayer offering that matches the quality of the AAPL/LucasFilm "Phantom Menace": apple.com As we move into faster bandwidths, consumers will expect the internet to be a provider of broadcast quality programming. I believe QT4 has the edge. BTW, I'd keep my eye and see what SUNW does with QT. Sure, they and AAPL compete on low-end servers, but AAPL has done a lot to support 100% pure Java. And we all know SUNW would never touch MediaPlayer. Be good. soup