Does anyone have a review of ASP.Net Media Suite located on
http://www.aspnetmedia.com/
The tool seems pretty nice, but i've never heard of the company. I'm hesitant to purchase and install something from an unknown source.
Can anyone vouch for the product?
well,
i have sent many emails, and never got an answer, if you ask me you are better with many other alternatives,
like there is an a amazing flash control i use
http://www.flash-control.net/
it does everything to implement flash like XHTML valid inclusion, Option to install flash if not available, Flash Vars, etc...
then you can choose of millions of flash mp3 players, video players on net which use XML, then simply you create the XML in code and hook any special Flashvars with this control and you have a great media player.
here is a nice site i always got to for such stuff
www.flashden.net.
hope this helps.
Related
I'm looking for a simple mp3 control, my project is an ASP.NET web site (VS2008/C#), I've searched a lot but there was no luck, how can I give my users a small mp3 player control which enables them to pause/stop/change music? I want it to be usable in all major browsers, and of course no Silverlight as SL is still not widely supported, what are my options?
thanks
Without knowing more details here is my suggestion.
You can use one of the many open source flash players available. These players can play MP3's. Flash is installed by more than 90% of all browsers. You could also use a service like HulkShare that will allow you to upload your files then give you the HTML required to embed it into your site.
I have been told that I need to create a way for users to copy and paste files in to a website. The requirement is that it can not be flash but it can be Silverlight. It is ok if it is Windows/IE only, and it can not be drag and drop (that would be way too easy, right?), it has to be pasting files.
I'm fairly certain this can not be done. One of the developers here said there must be a way since Sharepoint does it, but I believe they're using the Windows Explorer COM object for that. If that's true the user would have to have some sort of network access to the folder and it is probably crawling with security considerations.
Any ideas on how to support pasting of files in the browser without flash?
Well... In Silverlight 4 you could look into the Clipboard object, but I can tell you it only supports text.
You have the Silverlight 4 tag on this question, so I will say I'm pretty sure it's not possible yet.
If I were you I would make a list of all the client-side technologies that are acceptable: Silverlight, Flex, etc and research each one. But those smart client technologies generally don't allow that kind of access for security reasons.
Worst case, you could always build a COM object. :)
I have a feeling this cannot be done with anything other than the likes of flash/silverlight due to security restrictions.
Telerik do a silverlight one... http://www.telerik.com/products/silverlight/upload.aspx
And I guess you could develop your own.
I am considering creating a website with the complexity of Facebook that should be able to scale into the millions of users. My question is: Is there any reason not to use Adobe Flex for such large project apart from the obvious point of requiring everyone to have Flash installed and not having to rely on Adobe? In my view Adobe Flex would reduce the server load for Facebook, because more of the work could me done on the client side. Do you agree?
Of course Facebook could have been implemented in Flash. But then the question is would it have succeeded? There are reasons big web companies like Google, Facebook and Yahoo only use Flash as sparingly as possible.
The thing I would fear most is alienating users. The Flash plugin isn't the best piece of software out there. It is slow and likely to crash once in a while. If your app gets bigger you might get some loading times that might not be acceptable to your users. Also in my opinion full Flash sites just don't feel right because they behave differently from HTML websites. All great websites like Google, Flickr, Stackoverflow or Facebook feel very light and slick which is very elegant makes up for great usability.
And then HTML and JavaScript are a lot more flexible. Do you want your website to be available on smartphonse? The iPhone has no Flash and even with phones that do you have the problem that users will very likely hate a full Flash site since those phones don't necessarily scale Flash as nicely as they scale HTML and Flash draws battery like crazy. If someone comes up with another revolution like smartphones you can be sure it supports HTML and JavaScript but you can't be so sure about Flash.
Then the question is how would you gain any efficiency? Of course you can write your UI with Flex and just call very lightweight webservices like you would use them for AJAX and you can even cache some of the content of the site locally so that you don't transmit more data as necessary for user interaction (the UI is transmitted only once). But you can also do that with JavaScript. You can write your UI in HTML and JavaScript, load it once and then just pull the naked JSON data from the servers and render it using JavaScript. You can also fetch lots of this data in advance to get the number of requests down. But still such an approach has its cons. Did you ever notice that when you type an answer on stackoverflow and someone else submits an answer you get notified while typing your answer. Such real time features are very cool and you might want this at some point in time which means more server interaction.
But whatever you do your servers still have to scale if your site grows. Even if you minimize the number of GET requests that hit your servers they will still grow a lot when your site gets popular and you will need a lot of servers to handle you will just improve your users/servers ratio.
The most interesting point though is that Flex is much easier to program than AJAX (think about browser incompatibilities for instance) and still AJAX was not only invented but the whole world messes with all those problems that come with it instead of using Flex. I think this tells a lot about of the value of the result you get when creating a full website in Flash.
Go to facebook and do view source...do you see all that JavaScript? That all runs client side
Johannes is right to point out the difference for server vs. client. The server side stuff is what needs to scale.
As an example, the Microsoft Silverlight team has assembled a facebook client app in silverlight (using the Facebook public API). My point is, using todays technologies, it is entirely possible to write a web application targeting many different kinds of client technologies: classic web browsers (HTML/javascript), 'rich internet applications' (flex, silverlight), ...
See also the myriad of Twitter clients out there.
The company I work for has a large app in Flash that is used by Governments. It is very hard to maintain and does fail sometimes. The problem is all of the .fla and .as files that have to be altered just to make a small change. Yes, the app could have been built better but even so, it is still harder to maintain than an HTML/JavaScript front end.
While I love writing Flash/Flex apps, I believe they should complement a site and not be the site.
Using a good JavaScript framework like jQuery takes the Browser compatibility question out of the picture (for the most part) and allows a lot of functionality.
Flex is the GUI for the client. You still need server-side storage and that's what has to scale. The user interface could be in Flex, while most of your users won't like such interfaces.
You will have to do a custom version of your site for the iPad/iPhone.
There are other ways of moving load to the client side. Javascript will give you porting headaches, but less than moving away from the entire architecture like Flex.
OTOH when you get a million users you'll have the resources to reimplement your site.
I don't think you would see a performance advantage with a site like Facebook, because the content is highly dynamic, comes from many different places, and is created by many independent entities. Flash (and therefore Flex) is better for monolithic apps from a single source that don't need to change very often.
The default in Flash is to build everything into a single .swf file that holds everything. It is possible to break out of this default behavior, of course. You can make web service calls, pull in external components via the SWC mechanism, load static content via HTTP, etc. Nevertheless, it's not the default pattern, which affects how Flash development libraries and tools work. Besides, the more of this you do, the less of the "run everything we possibly can on the client side" benefit you get. It gets soaked up in HTTP connection overhead.
The default on the plain old standards-based web is to store all assets separately and assemble them dynamically at the client. This is one reason the web is slow -- again, all that HTTP connection overhead -- but also why it is flexible and dynamic. It mates well with a site like Facebook which requires constant evolution by a lot of independent developers.
I say this having developed a Flex app, which I am happy with. Only one person -- me -- has to maintain it, and it's naturally a monolithic app. It plays right into Flex's strengths.
Hi I am currently designing a website for a client - the site will be written in asp.net with a cms built in. My client has come back saying he wants to play mp4s on the site - plus being able to embed some other videos from youtube, vimeo etc.... in his blog - I have managed to convice my client that playing .flv would be better for obvious reasons (which he has agreed is OK). but when I went back to my coder, he said that because of the fact its a dynamic site that it will take 2 days to get this working (in terms of creating the mechanics to allow my client to up load his movies etc.....)
Is this correct - as my client is under the impression that it should be a simple thing to do - while my coder tells me that its not that simple.
I am in the middle of all of this - can you help please!!!!
At the end of the day only the coder you are using knows exactly how much effort is required here. You have to trust them. This almost certainly not trivial. Make sure you and the coder understand exactly what's being asked for here and that neither of you are assuming anything about how the client expects it to work.
Is your client a programmer? Non-programmers should never dictate how long a programming task should take.
If you're cowboy coding without testing "today" would probably suffice, but any sane and professional development shop would never let this happen.
Now let's clarify what your client really told you to do:
Your dev seems to be assuming that he has to support adding/uploading videos from your CMS.
If your dev is going to use a 3rd party API like YouTube, 2 sounds reasonable. If you're going to serve it on your own site, it'd take at least a week's worth of programming to make sure your site can take such a heavy load of streaming data -- it's stupid, not to mention highly irresponsible, to assume it could be worked out in a day.
Now, if you're client is only really talking about embedding videos in blog entries or articles, that's a very trivial task: YouTube, Vimeo and other video sharing sites already supply the HTML embed code that's needed to display a video on a page. In fact that's a zero effort task assuming that your blog entry editor properly parses the embed code, or has an Edit HTML feature.
So, which one is which?
This might be a good occasion to use the <video> tags. It might simplify things at the cost of only supporting users with recent browsers.
Two days is a quite optimistic estimate for all that you've mentioned. Maybe for embedding YouTube videos only, but for upload/storage/streaming of videos on the local server it's a different thing entirely.
But if you don't understand programming yourself, then you have to trust the expert that you've hired to do the job for you, and you have to tell the client that is how long it will take. The fact is that these things aren't trivial to write, there's the front end website management interface that needs creating, and the back end server software that manages what to do with the uploaded file. Never mind integration and making sure it's easy for the client to run a workflow of upload file, incorporate that video inside some content in the CMS, and so on.
I just recently did this, you need to get videoLan http://www.videolan.org/
This streams mostly anything, after you set up a streaming site it's easy!
I am wondering if there is any codes sample for ASP.NET with Voice recording.
Ok, Basically, i want to create a web page that allow user to click a record button and record his voice thru his/her microphone and then convert it into mp3 file, then i want to click PLAY button to play what was recorded.
I have searched google alot and cannot find any codes that code do just that.
I have seen site that can do just that and it is using FLASH with RoR (i think).
Is there any way to record voice using ASP.NET?
I dont care if it need to combine with FLASH with ASP.NET, as long as it is possible.
Thanks.
EDIT:
Stephen M. Redd,
Appreciate your input. Yes, i know there is no simple way to accomplish what i am asking for. I also have researched and google alot on this question. Yes,I have come to know the best way to do this is through using FLASH with either FMS or RED5 (open source).
So i am trying to figure out how to write a simple FLASH (.swf) that i can record voice and then save into mp3 format to RED5 server.
Do you know or can you provide any directions to what i am asking above?
1) Tutorial on Microphone class in FLASH (i am reading some basic implementation from a book called "FLASH Actionscript in a classroom", which doesnt tell me how to record voice but ONLY how to use microphone object in FLASH)
2) Tutorial on how to setup and use RED5 (FMS is NOT an option due to its cost)
3) how to integrate 1) and 2) with asp.net and javascript (if there is any flashvars that the FLASH microphon .swf i can access so that ASP.NET can be used with javascript)
Thanks.
EDIT 2:
I cant consider to accept an answer BECAUSE none of them has provided a good answer.
Take a look on my question and read the comments i got, and you will see that my question was NOT being provided a good answer.
My question is to find a web-based Audio/Voice recorder so that the users can record their voice on the site.
To better convey what i exactly asked for, take a look at www.snapvine.com or www.pubclip.com . Both of them provide a way for users to record their voice right on the webpage.
So, i am looking for a FLASH component (.swf) similar to what they offer to integrate with my site.
EDIT 3:
This voice/microphone recording thing seem to be a challenging project for most developers.
I guess this means i am all alone.
I think this is something that would have to be done with Flash.
This guy appears to have some examples of doing voice recording in Flash, with code samples:
http://fms.denniehoopingarner.com/
There is no simple way to do this kind of thing. Standard web technologies based on HTTP and HTML just don't have the features. HTTP doesn't work well with moving audio data, and HTML and Javascript are not able to talk directly to the hosting OS or hardware resources like the microphone.
There are 3rd party browser plug-ins and applets that you may be able to use via a web application to do this kind of thing.
Most people use Flash and the Flash Media Server to do audio input via the web.
There are also some Java applets that have similar capabilities such as the ListenUp SDK (I have not used this, so it isn't an endorsement).
There is a lot of discussion on this topic related to Microsoft Silverlight, but as I understand it voice and camera inputs from the client side are not supported as of Silverlight 2, though it may get put into Silverlight 3. There is a good bit of information about how to use the necessary Flash bits within a Silverlight application though. For more info on that, check out this post.
ASP.net is a Server-Side Technology, but voice recording is done Client side. So regardless if you use ASP.net, PHP, Ruby on Rails or Cobol, you can't do it directly.
What you need is a Client-Side Application that works together with the Server Side to accomplish this. I do not know if Silverlight can do Microphone recording, but Flash can. This is apparently quite easy using the Flash Media Interactive Server, but normally you should be able to do this without, i.e. just by having a Flash Application doing the recording and then Uploading it to the server.
Hi Sam in Silverlight 4 it is possible to record voice from microphone and webcams.
Just follow the blog.
http://blog.ondrejsv.com/post/Audio-recorder-Silverlight-4-sample.aspx
Good Luck