Webcasting Cable Channels

1
WebcastingCable Channels Campus Events

• Thomas Brenneman
• Director, UMKC-IVN/MTS

2
Meeting new challenges

• Why Webcasting?
• Using the Internet to reach students/patrons at a
  distance.
• Enriching the web experience.
• Supplementing traditional and web based courses.
• Making the technology easy to use.

3
Cooperation between Departments

• Interactive Video Network/Multimedia Technology
  Services provides expertise to assist UMKC
  Departments to overcome technology challenges.
  IVN/MTS provides assistive services for clients
  not able to complete the project in-house.

4
Benefits

• Collaboration is extremely beneficial since it
  builds momentum towards similar goals.
• Lower costs per department
• Sharing costs in software licensing fees
• Shared expertise
• UMKC Library personnel was extremely
  knowledgeable in audio recording qualities.
• Similar Goals
• Knowing what other departments are planning helps
  in providing focus in moving the campus strategic
  initiatives forward.

5
Data Networks vs. Cable Distribution

• Traditional Campus Cable
• Using Coax and Fiber for distribution.
• Most Commercial Cable Systems
• Cable Channels are 1st in priority
• Data Network is second.
• Most University Systems
• Data Networks are 1st in priority
• Cable Channels are a distant 2nd.
• Normally the cable channels are on a segregated
  distribution system.
• Do we use limited fiber resources for cable
  systems?

6
Campus Data Networks

• Becoming a better choice for delivery
• Expanded bandwidth (Internet-2 and Local LANs to
  1 Gigabits)
• More staff, faculty and students have computers
  and network access.
• Program delivery needed at the desktop, lab or
  classroom.
• Classrooms are getting computers and high
  resolution projection systems.

7
If you decide to Webcast

• What system do you use?
• A Comparison of several streaming systems.
• Chart data from Network Computing.com
• Hardware or Software Encoding/Decoding
• End User Requirements?
• LAN or Internet?
• Available Bandwidth?

8
Apple Darwin Streaming Server 4, Quicktime Player
5

• When most people hear the word Apple, they
  immediately think of solutions that require
  adding Macintosh computers to their networks.
• Apple's Darwin Streaming Server, this couldn't be
  further from the truth.
• Apple's streaming server is available for several
  operating systems as a precompiled binary or as
  source code.
• In blind testing, we picked the images from the
  Darwin Streaming Server as either the best or the
  second best in bandwidth tests.
• And with the server software being given away,
  finding fault with it is hard.

9
RealNetworks RealSystem iQ

• Offering the most expensive of the solutions.
• RealNetworks did provides the easiest-to-configure
  and -use servers.
• RealSystem iQ server might have edged out Apple's
  Darwin Server were it not for the price, which
  ratchets up with the more streams you need to
  serve.
• For large needs, this can quickly add up into the
  tens of thousands of dollars. Even a small
  enterprise of 500 users would pay 3,995 for the
  server software only a 2,000-user company would
  wind up shelling out 5,995.

10
Microsoft Windows Media Services

• Microsoft Media Services' images scored dead last
  in quality tests.
• Unless you're an all-Microsoft shop, you can do
  better.
• Then again, it is free if you're already using
  Windows 2000 Server.
• Windows Media Services isn't available as a
  standalone product.
• For streaming a live video source, Media Services
  is the most difficult to configure, even though
  Microsoft provides step-by-step instructions for
  setting up such a stream.
• Live sources require users to create either a
  unicast (one sender, one receiver) or a multicast
  (one sender, many simultaneous receivers)
  station.
• A setup wizard is available to step you through
  the process, which creates the connection between
  the server and the encoder.
• While an experienced person could whip through
  this easily,
• we wish we could do it from one place instead of
  having to set up the encoder and server
  separately.

11
Hardware Encoding/Decoding

• The NAC TM -3000 is the latest series of live
  streaming video servers from Amnis Systems. The
  NAC-3000 is an Ethernet network attached MPEG
  encoding server specifically designed for video
  network applications, such as
• Distance Learning
• Surveillance
• Corporate Communications
• Content Distribution
• Training
• Telemedicine.
• Video-on-Demand
• Conferencing

12
Hardware Encoding/Decoding
DVD Quality LIVE Video, CD Quality AudioLow
cost, compact, full featured MPEG-2 network
appliance It's not just a codec, it is a video
network appliance. The VBrick 4000 Series
delivers true broadcast quality video over IP,
and features integral web server,  LCD front
panel display, and  single or dual MPEG-2
channels.  Configure and manage your VBrick with
any web browser.  Multiple VBrick 4000's mounted
in VBrick's rack adapter support high density
encoding applications. VBrick has reduced the
complexity (and the cost!) of MPEG-2 video
networking.
13
Cost Breakdown SuggestionsDont forget
production costs!

• Support 11
• Servers 11
• Software 4
• Bandwidth 49
• Program Development 26
• Will vary depending on program

14
Audio Only Application
Womens Athletics
15
Campus Cable Womens Athletics Projects
Keyboard Kids Project that was broadcast via
Webcasting and local cable access.
Archive page for past games
16
Cable TV New Look
17
In Summary

• Streaming Video
• IP video has come a long way. The quality has
  improved dramatically, and the expense is
  relatively low -- even free, if you use
  software-based streaming-video servers. And
  digital video is not just for downloading clips
  from the Internet anymore. Within the past year,
  companies have begun exploring the use of video
  for a variety of internal purposes to drive down
  other expenses, such as travel, while giving
  employees access to videoconferences, training
  sessions and other high-quality visual
  applications.
• But you can still expect a trade-off between the
  relatively inexpensive software servers from
  Apple Computer, Microsoft Corp. and RealNetworks
  and the pricier hardware-encoding solutions from
  Amnis Systems and VBrick Systems. Both hardware
  and software solutions provide good-quality
  video. The software solutions let video traffic
  run at lower bit rates than hardware encoders
  require, but there's a visual cost Image quality
  degrades when it's transmitted at lower speeds.
• Our review of streaming video options covers the
  three major software servers, Apple's Darwin
  Streaming Server 4, Microsoft's Windows Media
  Services and RealNetworks' RealSystem iQ. We also
  examine
• .

18
URLs on Products

• VBrick Information
• http//www.vbrick.com/VB_4000.asp
• Aminis Information
• http//www.amnisinc.com/products/nac3.html
• Microsoft Media Information
• http//www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/defa
  ult.asp
• Real Networks Information
• http//www.realnetworks.com/products/media_deliver
  y.html
• Apple Darwin Server Information
• http//www.publicsource.apple.com/projects/streami
  ng/
• Great Article on Webstreaming!
• http//www.networkcomputing.com/1306/1306f1.html

19
The End

• Thomas Brenneman, Director
• IVN/MTS
• brennemant_at_umkc.edu
• 816-235-1096
• 816-235-1170 (Fax)
• http//www.umkc.edu/is/mts