Rebooting Java Media, Part III: Conclusion

by Chris Adamson

Java needs to start over with a modern media library to stay relevant in multimedia, and possibly in desktop applications as a whole. But what's needed and who's going to pay for it? This is Part III.


9 Comments

Dalibor Topic
2007-01-04 00:25:09
The only thing that will change the game is content in some format that Java supports better/faster/cheaper than the alternatives. Content in FLV worked for Flash, and got it where it is. If creating content with Ogg, or what have you that Java could do well, becomes as common as it is with other media formats, then alternatives may have a chance to break into the area.


The only alternative I'd put my money on is WPF, due to the sheer market power of Microsoft's bundling, and being able to trivially provide support for Microsoft's codecs.

Mark
2007-01-04 08:09:58
What about Yahoo? They have done a lot in the past to support innovation, I'm thinking AJAX, Mobile, IM, etc. They have nowhere near the deep pockets of Google, but if they want to compete with Google, this may be a good way to build fortification. Amazon (as crazy as it sounds) may be another option given their recent foray into hosting.
lhe
2007-01-04 14:23:51
thank you very much for this wunderful article series and the splendid overview of JMF. Much appreciated
Ricker
2007-01-08 13:19:10
>>>Am I dreaming?
Yes


>>>Just in case the dream doesn't come true.
Wise man.


Struts is the COBOL.
Java Media is the new CORBA.

John Dowdell
2007-01-12 13:09:59
Hi, history note... Macromedia did develop and distribute a "Macromedia Flash Player for Java" back in the 90s, where SWFs would be rendered directly via a Java class... I think it was when transparency and MP3 audio was added to the native-code engines that it became too difficult to deliver in the platform-neutral engines of that day.


(For Linux, this has traditionally been handled in second-round development, after Mac & Win stabilized, usually a six-month gap... the current cycle was more dramatic, because Player versions 8 and 9 were two rapidfire releases, one focusing on graphics and the other on logic, and Linux went straight to 9... but the pull of YouTube put minority-platform people under greater constraint than before. The beta 9 Player for Linux has been up on Adobe Labs for awhile, and is nearing official release.)


jd/adobe


2007-01-16 21:29:38
Chris, I enjoyed reading your articles on Java media. You said a lot about Java media and raised the questions who is going to do. After more than 10 years of development of Java, Sun still can't do it right, at least in the desktop world. Media is very import in today's rich client. If WPF offers better solution, I would more developers using C# instead of Java.
Shawn Van Every
2007-03-04 11:45:59
Chris, you have done a nice write-up in this series that I think effectively lays out many Java developers frustrations with the current state of affairs. I for one have also been digging into Flash for my media development needs but am a bit frustrated by the lack of codec support, desktop playback and a whole host of other things.


Did I hear correctly that you put together a project to try to tackle the job of creating a new java media platform? If so, could you point to it?

Shawn Van Every
2007-03-04 14:27:06
Wanted to follow up with a blog post that summarizes some thoughts I had after reading this article:
http://www.walking-productions.com/notslop/2007/03/04/java-media-it-is-sad-but-i-dont-care-anymore/
Leo Kuznetsov
2007-05-03 16:53:01
Why should Sun license Flash video from Adobe? FLV is just derivation of H263 which is already implemented in JFM. Actually the quality of flash video is relatively poor because the H263 was aiming at video conferencing lo-bitrate talking head kind of encoding. H264 aka MP4-10 will be a good thing to implement but there are patent issues there. No doubt Flash did a great job on better enveloping of H263 codec with bells and whistles. But there is an important difference between envelope and the the video bitstream and w/o clear distinction it is not wise to judge any technology. I am curious to learn if I am wrong and Flash is actually better than I think it is.