Intelligent streaming - why not used?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

tr - 30 Jan 2004 02:16 GMT

If intelligent streaming (i.e. MBR streams) works so well
why do I still always see web sites offering separate bit
rates (e.g. they have you choose 56k or 100k or 300k).
Even the Microsoft sponsored sites. Why not just have one
link that picks an MBR stream and let the server and
player determine the correct bit rate? Is there something
about intelligent streaming and MBR that doesn't work as
well as having the user select a specific bit rate?
.

Reply to this Message

Tim 'StreamingMeeMee' Carter [MVP/Digital Media] - 30 Jan 2004 13:51 GMT

It's been awhile since I worked with the encoder but if memory serves,
prior to WMV9, MBR streams allowed only one bitrate for audio, the
multiple bitrate streams were only for the video portion.

I do also recall that single bitrate files had a slight quality edge,
but I may be wrong on that point.

T.

> If intelligent streaming (i.e. MBR streams) works so well
> why do I still always see web sites offering separate bit
> rates (e.g. they have you choose 56k or 100k or 300k).

Signature

Tim Carter / StreamingMeeMee
Frontier Digital
PH: 508.982.4800
AIM: streamingmeemee MSN: streamingmeemee@hotmail.com
Microsoft Digital Media MVP 2002-2004

Reply to this Message

Garkpit - 30 Jan 2004 20:26 GMT

If you want the best quality don't use MBR. It's that simple... The
same is true for Real btw.

See how we get around the problem at http://high.tv

G.

>It's been awhile since I worked with the encoder but if memory serves,
>prior to WMV9, MBR streams allowed only one bitrate for audio, the
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>> why do I still always see web sites offering separate bit
>> rates (e.g. they have you choose 56k or 100k or 300k).

Reply to this Message