There is a wealth of choice for the player platform in which you publish and present your video from. This article aims to offer advice and an independent view into the merits of each. We will follow up with our next post looking at the social and media options for the best places to publish and promote and that includes all the YouTube vs. Facebook debate that is currently raging.
Of course! The second biggest search engine on the internet, owned by Google therefore it works together with the search engine. Video can be organised so that you can have your own channel and introduce content themes and sub channels, so you become the broadcaster. The one big problem is its so darn big. 300 hours of content downloaded every minute, so your video is a very small needle in a very large haystack. And that much yearned for shareability requires a lot of time, effort and understanding to make YouTube work. There are tactics you can employ though (ask your local YouTube Certified agency) and these are worth investing in.
But what of the others…
Vimeo is a little like Apple used to be, for creatives. It is generally becoming accepted that Vimeo offers a better play quality to video. It’s all in the bitrates apparently. So what you get with Vimeo is a much smaller but much better informed audience (i.e. lots of creatives) that will make considered opinions on the content on your film (rather than the stupid abuse that is too common on YouTube). This can be enormously useful if you are testing out something or are looking to create a more filmic and attractive video for your site, where quality of output is key. There is cost but it’s not overly dear and if you are a creative agency you should be using it.
3. JW Player
JW Player has the easiest to use and least expensive (as long as views are low) self-hosting platform of all the popular player technologies. Self hosting allows you to be in control of you own content and not fearing the YouTube police and people ripping your content. You don’t have the watermarks that can annoy for Vimeo and YouTube. And it can offer a great video content management system. JW Player is especially useful if you are a publisher who relies on advertising revenue. You can sell your own inventory at the price you want instead of the poor ad returns from YouTube.
4. Brightcove, Kaltura, Ooyala
We’ve bunched these premium players as they (and more) operate in a very competitive environment. Their offerings being very similar and the costs equally hefty so they get lumped together in the commercial player bracket. Why would you employ them? Like JW Player, they are self hosting, so therefore not open to the public and you have more control. Publishing, education and broadcasting have traditionally been the main customer of these companies. They want to do all that JW Player offers (ad revenue, self hosting, standardising) but feel they have the security and support of a large technology business. They are heavy hitters in terms of marketing their service and will be a lot more visible to brands as they look to compete in that space.
5. Rapt, Interlude, Wirewax, I-VDO
These are arguably the top players of a growing of new bunch of interactive video players. Interactive Video blends interaction into video. Many commentators are suggesting that ‘soon all video will be interactive’. This means that there are some financially backed jostling from this new crowd each looking to find their niche in the movement, e.g. Wirewax retail and I-VDO data. Interactive video has become more robust (its biggest problem previously) with new broadband speeds and, as the early adopter crowd are finding out, it is video as the internet intended it. Watch this space closely.
Flowplayer. Vidyard, , Wistia, there are many more niche or longtail video players out there. And there are a number of live video specialists for the webcasting requirement. We know this is not a complete list but, if you have a video requirement, these are the main platforms from which you can make your choice of provider