 |
The Great Tree still kickin'
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Durin Mephit Great Tree Officer


Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 3119 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm reticent to consider YouTube at the moment. The quality is not great, the default video window is small... their business model is insane...
I think the Explorer's Guild is a possibility, although I've seen very little of Deg recently so I'm concerned they may be too busy with other things to get involved with us.
I'd be more inclined to look towards sites that have already demonstrated that they can handle high traffic loads, especially those that host video content already, but are within our community.
We could approach GoG and UruObsession and ask them if they have any interest in being mirror sites. Or perhaps someone at Cyan or GameTap might have some ideas.
Also, I've received an offer of hosting from TCT.
I believe everything is negotiable. If we can arrange that everyone reaches the videos through our media page, I see no problem with receiving hosting from other community groups. _________________ Durin Mephit * Member of Guild of Messengers - Unless otherwise stated, opinions are mine only and not Guild endorsed.
rel.to | Marten KI: 59474 | Durin M KI: 11883768 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Durin Mephit Great Tree Officer


Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 3119 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Do we have any more thoughts on how to address the bandwidth issue? What approaches are we currently pursuing? _________________ Durin Mephit * Member of Guild of Messengers - Unless otherwise stated, opinions are mine only and not Guild endorsed.
rel.to | Marten KI: 59474 | Durin M KI: 11883768 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Cycreim Great Tree Officer


Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 1274 Location: Toronto, ON
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd say we divert a low-quality version to YouTube, for people who want to watch the videos but can't stomach the long loading times. We could host smaller videos here on TGT too, smaller videos increase the bitrate by about 4x, allowing people to watch the videos as they load, which is the whole point of having them stream. _________________ KI: 34353 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Erik Great Tree Member


Joined: 23 Sep 2006 Posts: 1121 Location: the Netherlands
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can host the Dutch versions (when they are ready) on my webspace, if you like.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Durin Mephit Great Tree Officer


Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 3119 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reducing the size of the video does not solve the problem. If the bottleneck was at the viewer's side, then yes, I'd shrink the videos. I wouldn't blink twice at doing it. But the bottleneck is currently at Great Tree server. The problem is our ability to serve the videos at a reasonable pace.
9KB/s is very slow (less than twice the speed of a modem). The audience for Uru Live should be capable of downloading at a rate of 38K/s, minimum. And, I expect after Rand's feedback on Ep 1, the traffic jam to get Ep 2 will be much worse than Ep 1. We could shrink the video to 160x200, but if everyone tries to download it at the same time, we'll still be in trouble.
That is why I said, "thoughts on how to address the bandwidth issue."
I don't see any reason to use YouTube when we could negotiate with other sites to host the videos at full size. When I need to get to the airport, I do not consider walking before I consider calling a taxi, because walking is an inferior solution.
Another thing we could do is to simply NOT announce the video on all of the forums at the same time. We are partly guilty for causing the traffic jam ourselves.
"Smaller videos increase the bitrate" - what? Call Scotty quick, we're changing the laws of physics! _________________ Durin Mephit * Member of Guild of Messengers - Unless otherwise stated, opinions are mine only and not Guild endorsed.
rel.to | Marten KI: 59474 | Durin M KI: 11883768 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Professor Askew Great Tree Member

Joined: 23 Dec 2003 Posts: 2532 Location: Bloomfield, CT
|
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would like to see a delayed release of episodes on YouTube...since they are movies are of inferior quality...like part of a distribution life cycle. Better equipment...better connection...better movies. So, like when Episode 3 comes out on the media page, Zero is released on YouTube...4 on media, 1 on YouTube, and so on. _________________ Professor Daniel Askew - Securing our reality from the machinations of the Station Masters. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Cycreim Great Tree Officer


Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 1274 Location: Toronto, ON
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Marten: thank you for your bold lettering. I wouldn't have been able to read that sentence otherwise.
I'm not talking about file size, though, man. Shrinking the dimensions of the videos will allow more frames to be downloaded faster, increasing the bitrate and allowing the videos to stream way earlier. If the bitrate is low enough then people should be able to start watching the videos as soon as they click the link, because they'll be downloading faster than they can play. _________________ KI: 34353 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Durin Mephit Great Tree Officer


Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 3119 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cycreim,
We're colliding over the use of the word "bitrate", and you're saying something which doesn't make any sense to me
One definition of bitrate is the speed at which invidual bits - ones and zeros - are transferred over a connection. The connection type doesn't matter; it could be the internet, it could be a serial connection, or it could be the PCI bus in your computer. By this definition, bitrate is a function of the speed of the internet and has nothing to do with the video length, resolution, or quality. For the videos to stream effectively, we'd need to increase the bitrate of the Great Tree's upstream connection.
The definition you seem to be using for bitrate is instead a compression term, relative to the size of data chunks being streamed. For example, a popular mp3 "bitrate" is 128kbps. An mp3 with a larger bitrate (and higher quality sound) would be 192kbps. A lower quality would be 96kbps. If I understand correctly, in order to make our videos transfer faster with that definition of bitrate, we'd need to decrease the bitrate, not increase it. Smaller resolution = fewer bits per frame, and thus, fewer bits per second.
So that is why I got confused when you said we needed to increase the bitrate - it matched the first definition, by which none of the rest of your comments made any sense.
Maybe I am still misunderstanding. Be kind to me and explain what you mean by "increasing the bitrate" because right now, I don't see how decreasing the resolution increases the bitrate - that's mumbo jumbo to me. _________________ Durin Mephit * Member of Guild of Messengers - Unless otherwise stated, opinions are mine only and not Guild endorsed.
rel.to | Marten KI: 59474 | Durin M KI: 11883768 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Cycreim Great Tree Officer


Joined: 22 Dec 2003 Posts: 1274 Location: Toronto, ON
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Haha, okay, no I'm being stupid. I was getting my various concepts mixed up. Fine. I meant to say "decrese the bitrate". It will make watching the videos easier on servers with limited upload bandwidth. _________________ KI: 34353 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
janaba1 Great Tree Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 1639 Location: berlin, germany
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
from what i have read until now, this is my opinion:
it is impossible, to meet the requirements of everybody
I’ve just again tested the available mirrors and downloaded from both of them
with 175/180 kb/sec
as it is clear, that our problem has something to do with the amount of people that
are downloading the files at the same time, I think, that the idea to provide/announce
the files on the forums time-delayed, as marten proposed, is perfect.
in general I please you to leave the wonderful high quality files with the given
resolution as more and more people are using a broadband connection and love
those videos made of gold with the possibility to watch them in double or fullsize,
deeming it worthy waiting for the download if necessary
btw from the “german view” there was not anyone complaining the download.
they didn’t even mention it. everybody is very thankful and impressed and
impatiently awaiting the sequels…
another important fact is, that by decreasing the resolution the subtitles, as lc
already mentioned, will be hard to read (especially for the people of 45 and up…
and there are quite a lot of them)
on the other hand we of course have to care for those with a slow line (modem
connection) and the ones impatiently waiting for the download if needed.
one solution is already metioned above (point 2), but that won’t help much, if
the connection (the bitrate of the upstream connection as I understood)
is in general slow.
“I don't see any reason to use YouTube when we could negotiate with other sites
to host the videos at full size” (the figurative example mentioned after is very nice
and funny.lol), as marten suggested, could be an appropriate solution, too.
if there’s really no other way than to “additionaly” provide the videos on servers like
You Tube, through decreasing size, resolution and quality (OMG),maybe we should
do this the way professor askew proposed it
“I would like to see a delayed release of episodes on YouTube...since they are movies are of
inferior quality...like part of a distribution life cycle. Better equipment...better connection...better
movies. So, like when Episode 3 comes out on the media page, Zero is released on YouTube...
4 on media, 1 on YouTube, and so on”
but I still hope, anyone or all of you will find a better solution to meet more or less everybody’s
need…
jana  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Lord Chaos Great Tree Member

Joined: 13 Aug 2006 Posts: 208
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
A couple of thoughts that might help a little:
1. Set up an Email ring. I could Email the video file to a few people, who would then not need to download from the server. Recipients would have to set up to recognize my address as legitimate, and also be able to receive big files. I have no trouble shipping them, but sometimes the recipient has limits. People who receive by Email could send it on to a few others.
2. Use dropload.com to get the video out to some of the Emailing crew. You upload the file and then the recipient goes to Dropload and dlownloads it. I've used this for files too big for a receiver's Email.
I don't know how much these would reduce the load on the server here, but they might help. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Erik Great Tree Member


Joined: 23 Sep 2006 Posts: 1121 Location: the Netherlands
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another idea is bittorrent... Then, multiple people are uploading the video, and you don't have bandwith problems.
I can still host some videos... I have 16 GB bandwidth on my webspace... I think that will be enough for all translations for example... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
brian Fearless Leader


Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 1372 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's actually a really good problem to have, if you think about it...
I'm still talking to my friend who hosts this site, he's pretty busy lately... the only other solutions I have are to set up a dreamhost or serverbeach account, but that won't be free. _________________ #Brian Fioca
#KI: 11882331
#KI: 1504111 [disconnected]
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Durin Mephit Great Tree Officer


Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 3119 Location: Tigard, OR
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Brian,
I haven't seen you comment on the idea of co-ordinating with other sites to mirror the content (before announcements go out), and perhaps having a pick-script similar to the way Cyan distributes the Until Uru client.
What are your thoughts on that suggestion?
I'm personally very upbeat on the idea of distributing the load onto sites that are willing to share the burden, but perhaps you have some insights that I haven't considered. _________________ Durin Mephit * Member of Guild of Messengers - Unless otherwise stated, opinions are mine only and not Guild endorsed.
rel.to | Marten KI: 59474 | Durin M KI: 11883768 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
brian Fearless Leader


Joined: 24 Jun 2003 Posts: 1372 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think that's a great idea. I'm trying to think of a good way to coordinate it... _________________ #Brian Fioca
#KI: 11882331
#KI: 1504111 [disconnected]
 |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|