Loading user information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading user information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


Clint Rutkas Clint I'm a "developer"
  • Spam isn't killing email, automatic spam filter is killing it. WHY isn't nobody fixing this?

    TommyCarlier said:
    figuerres said:

    Our company has created a system that could replace e-mail, that is secure by default, that uses a white-list system to eliminate spam, but apparently people are not interested in such a system.

    whitelist systems have been done and in my opinion are extremely annoying.  They force an extra step that semi defeats the ease of email.

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    Roeland said:

    First 10 seconds are not so good, then it starts getting better. Good stuf, keep going!

    part of adaptive smooth streaming.  You have trade offs.  It ramps up the quality but this ramp up allows for instant playback and zero buffering.

  • Windows 7 64 bit - wireless N USB Network card - anyone got one working?

    I have a Linksys WUSB600N Dual-Band Wireless-N USB Network Adapter which runs fine under Win7 x64

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    Dr Herbie said:
    Clint said:

    Ok, retested.

    On a 1.45 MBit link the quality did improve after about 20-30 seconds, but when viewed in full-screen the text was poor.  So it's perfectly fine for talking heads but for a screencast I'd want the current, buffered system instead; I'd rather be patient and get higher quality video.

    Looks like we might need both ways.



    I hear you on that, I have some POCs Smiley

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    aldenml said:

    Hi Clint, I think your are not coding to the highest quality level possible. For example, in RobbieBCES2010, I can easily get the 1605000 bitrate but the edges are extremely aliased compared to the original video. Is there a reason for that? Why not to code the 2000000+ levels?


    Using Smooth Streaming here is a good move!!

    can you send me a screen shot where I can see the time bar?

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    Sven Groot said:

    It's definitely better than the previous two attempts. It starts off sort of blocky but after only about 3-5 seconds it becomes much better. Jumping around is quick, but can occasionally cause it to fall back to a lower quality stream again after which it's very reluctant to go back up.


    However, I still am not in favour of this. The current, non-smooth streaming videos start just as fast, and have high quality right from the start. There is no argument why we'd even need smooth streaming with my connection.

    like CKurt mentioned, the feedback about progressive (buffered) playback is not lost.  This test for Channel 9 to see do people like it, does it work for them, do they like the trade offs.

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    aL_ said:

    looks good, but i think im not reaching full bandwidth on the bach vid for some reason.. blockyness clears up in ~20 seconds for me

    on a wired 100/100mbit connection in sweden. jumping around is snappy though. i know its not about the player but a bandwidth meter would help us helping you Smiley

    Doing a bandwith meter is "interesting" ... I have two different solutions, one I'm not thrilled with, other doesn't work properly for a few reasons.  Smooth Streaming Beta 2 may have fixed some of the issues I was having with the second one.  The big issue was the difference between normal and full screen.

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    Bass said:

    The quality seems a little lower then the regular videos on the site. More artifacty.

    All depends what stream you are viewing at.  The idea is the player will grab what is the highest possible for that player size.  Currently we send a WMV to you that is far higher quality.  So if you watch the video non-full screen, you are getting data you don't want.  However the plus side to this is you can then automatically transition into full screen and have what will appear to be zero quality loss.  With smooth streaming, it will take a few for you to step up in quality.


    Different tech for different purposes.  Each have advantages and disadvantages.


    I'd love to see a screen shot, know your geo, and what your internet connection type is, if at all possible.  clint.rutkas@microsoft.com

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    intelman said:
    Clint said:

    Those videos work much better than what is currently implemented Sad I want it now. It was smooth fast and I could skip ahead with little delay. Currently the silverlight player just freezes Sad

    This is why I'm testing out the tech and we're building in the toys needed Smiley

  • Smooth Streaming Test #3!

    dentaku said:

    It took almost 30 sec for the MEF & Silverlight 4 Beta video to get totally clear then I tried it again later and it only took 15 sec before it jumped into good quality. I'm not sure if the other videos had the same problem because they don't have small text in them.

    The http://www.iis.net/media/experiencesmoothstreaming demo only takes 5 to 9 seconds to get good and clear.

    I have a 15mbit cable connection.

    it all depends on the data streams getting sent.  If the player thinks it isn't getting enough to sustain a certian bitrate stream, it will drop down.


    For the two different experiences, the network connection could have been saturated at one point and not the another point in time.