dcsimg
Linux Today: Linux News On Internet Time.




More on LinuxToday


Streaming media and Free Software

Jan 12, 2000, 07:27 (25 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Raphael Bauduin)

WEBINAR:
On-Demand

Desktop-as-a-Service Designed for Any Cloud ? Nutanix Frame


By Raphael Bauduin

[ The opinions expressed by authors on Linux Today are their own. They speak only for themselves and not for Linux Today. ]

I express in this text my personal opinion on the danger I think could arise if the famous company from Redmond wins the streaming war against RealNetworks as it won the browser war against Netscape. The fact that I didn't read anything on that subject yet makes me wonder if I'm completely wrong. Just let me know if this is the case :-)

In the last weeks, we've heard news that Microsoft was gaining ground in the streaming media field against RealNetworks. Warner Bros. chose Windows Media and left RealNetworks aside for a part of their site. Yahoo is also said to choose M$ technology in place of RealNetworks'. This makes me afraid: I exclusively use Linux, and the only streaming technology available (as far as I know) on Linux is coming from the RealNetworks people: you have the player and the server running on Linux.

Again, the problem with the Redmond technology is that it's only available on platforms M$ doesn't see as a threat to their empire. So, don't hope to see the Windows Media Player on Linux soon. Nor the server. And that's the biggest problem, I think. If companies decide to standardize on M$ streaming technology, they won't be able to choose the platform they're running on. It will have to be NT.

But where's the problem coming from? Is RealNetworks arrogant when dealing with customers? If that's it, they give a unique opportunity to M$. Netscape rejected requests from AOL to customize Navigator. AOL went to M$... Netscape thought they were too strong to have to accept the deal with AOL. I hope RealNetworks doesn't think they're too strong to deal respectfully with their customers.

But I'm afraid this is the problem. Why would Yahoo want to go with M$ technology? They use free software to run their business. Why standardize on M$ technology? Not because of the price: Linux + Real Server must be around the same price as Windows NT + IIS + Windows Media Server. Plus, freedom has no price! The problem must be in the attitude from RealNetworks.

What's more, I think M$ is trying to do the same thing to Real it did to Netscape: cut the air supply. They bundle their player (on the desktop) and their server (on the... server) with Windows. This is not important for sites like Yahoo, but it is important for other sites that decide to use NT: why look to RealNetworks if I already got a streaming server installed with my OS?

Anyway, how can RealNetworks hope to survive without revenues from their software? I read they hoped to do it by becoming a media company, just like Netscape wanted with Netcenter. The problem is: by becoming a media company, they'll begin to compete against their customers, and these could abandon the RealNetworks technology. This means these customers will become Windows based sites (do you think the server side runs on another platform than Windows?).

I also imagine Windows Media runs best with IIS. So there goes the market share of Apache (streaming servers will become more and more ubiquitous on the Internet). One tactic for Real would be to bundle their servers with an OS..... They could do it without any problem (I think) -- delivering their servers on Linux and with Apache. They could provide the same integration on the server side as M$. Sadly, I never heard anything like that from Rob Glaser.

My biggest problem is not that M$ would win, my problem is that they would win by playing unfairly. We can hope the M$ trial will save RealNetworks before it's too late. Because if RealNetworks looses, Free Software loses...

A copy of this article (and eventual updates of it) is available on my page.
You can contact me at raph@arafox.com