Talk:Adaptive bitrate streaming

NPOV?

Certain sections of this article, especially "Benefits of adaptive bit rate streaming," sound to me like advertising even though they are not promoting a specific company. Anyone else have this impression? Dedrick (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The article needs work. I don't know if it is useful to identify the exact nature of the problems. Just start editing. --Kvng (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The section on Quavlive is a copypaste from the Quavlive website. The name of the original author User:Mascolois the same as an Associate Professor at the Italian University where the paper was published, and one of the papers authors. Pending potential future notbility, I would delete the section on Quavlive.Michaelfaq (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC).

Criticism

This part of the current criticism section is a comparison of two implementations and not a criticism of adaptive streaming. Since both methods are adaptive bit streaming they should just be described in a "variations" section.

The method of segmenting files into smaller files used by some implementations (as used by HTTP Live Streaming) could be deemed unnecessary due to the ability of HTTP clients to request byte ranges from a single video asset file that could have multiple video tracks at differing bit rates with the manifest file only indicating track number and bit rate. However, this approach allows for serving of chunks by any simple HTTP server and so therefore guarantees CDN compatibility. Implementations using byte ranges such as Microsoft Smooth Streaming require a dedicated HTTP server such as IIS to respond to the requests for video asset chunks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.184.76 (talk) 14:34, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.quavlive.com/adaptive-streaming#TOC-Quavlive-Adaptive-Streaming-Demo-. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Dpmuk (talk) 05:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Please note that in this case there would be little point in us getting permission as the text in it's current form is over promotional. Dpmuk (talk) 05:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

MPEG-DASH

- it could be interesting to write something about the new emerging sandards of the sector, like DASH  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.192.5.34 (talk) 11:04, 21 November 2011 (UTC) 

Shouldn't MPEG-DASH be included here? The Seventh Taylor (talk) 08:18, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done I've added a link and short description. Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP is not very accessible. --Kvng (talk) 19:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Bit Rate or Bitrate?

I noticed that the topic bit rate is two words, and this one uses bitrate as one word. Can anyone confirm if there is an accepted spelling and post a reference like an O'Reilly book? Trade journals seems to be spelling it both ways with preference leaning toward bitrate. Fighuhldz (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Based on Google searches, it looks like "bit rate" is more common than "bitrate" but "adaptive bitrate streaming" is more common than "adaptive bit rate streaming". Conclusion: everything is as it should be; language can be quirky. --Kvng (talk) 14:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

And yet it appears "ABR" is the common acronym for "adaptive bitrate", in line with CBR and VBR (for constant and variable bitrate) before it : ) The Seventh Taylor (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but this is similar to the way HTTP stands for HyperText Transfer Protocol, so it seems that the acronym rules are flexible. Also, It seems that "bitrate" is most common in the scientific community. It is, for instance, used in the MPEG-DASH whitepaper SaysRgHnqKjsR (talk) 10:48, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

References

History section has no years

How can it be history if you don't talk about time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE89:9930:9933:5ECA:11CC:B8A2 (talk) 18:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

History section is incorrect. DVD Forum did not invent Adaptive Bitrate Streaming

Adaptive bit rate over HTTP was created by the DVD Forum at the WG1 Special Streaming group in October 2002. The group was co-chaired by Toshiba and Phoenix Technologies, The expert group count with the collaboration of Microsoft, Apple Computer, DTS Inc., Warner Brothers, 20th Century Fox, Digital Deluxe, Disney, Macromedia and Akamai.[citation needed] The technology was originally called DVDoverIP and was an integral effort of the DVD ENAV book.

The DVD Forum did not invent Adaptive Bitrate Streaming or Adaptive Bitrate Streaming over HTTP. What is mentioned in the DVD-ENAV-book is a technology with the ability to provide extra information delivered over the internet while watching a DVD. Not delivering the actual content over HTTP. It does, however, seem plausible that what mentioned in DVD-ENAV is the inspiration behind the Media Presentation Description (MPD) used in solutions like MPEG-DASH, even though much more primitive. (Both use XML and they share a similar model)

In the following patents we can see a description very much resembling HTTP Adaptive Streaming with filing dates dating back to 1999. and May 2002. both clearly before the DVD Forum supposedly "invented" Adaptibe bitrate streaming in October 2002.

1: 2:

SaysRgHnqKjsR (talk) 14:45, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

References

ADP now used by Youtube

Very little info is around on converting ADP Youtube videos (allegedly in mp4 format). 60.242.247.177 (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adaptive bitrate streaming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120820233136/http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/meetings/geneva11-1/geneva_press.htm to http://mpeg.chiariglione.org/meetings/geneva11-1/geneva_press.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)