10-17-2013 06:49 AM
49 12
tools
  1. JonnieLasVegas's Avatar
    Again I reiterate: Google does not screw with Metrotube or other 3rd party providers. I am unsure why nobody considers that fact. This means to me that Google does not want to deny WP users, just that they want MS to play by the rules. And the fact that the platform is not ready, after TWO years, is whose fault?
    I just jumped in after seeing this comment, so I'm not sure the entirety of this convo. That being said, metrotube and others also do not play by the rules. They skip ads, allow you to download and save videos, etc. Weren't these two of the few reasons that google denied Microsoft's YouTube app? I think it's more they want to make Microsoft look bad, which Microsoft is perfectly capable of doing on its own.
    10-11-2013 11:33 AM
  2. Verkunder's Avatar
    We can point fingers all day. At the end of the day, Windows Phone doesn't have proper support for Google services. I may not be someone that depends on their services, but I don't care how we reach the point where Windows Phone users get what they should--it just needs to happen.
    10-11-2013 11:55 AM
  3. dang121's Avatar
    You know the market share argument is funny to me. The Nintendo Wii U which barely have any user but yet Google make a YT app for it. Overall, WP user is > Wii U user but no YT app. You can spin the argument any way you want, the bottom line is Google don't want to make a app for WP or support WP for whatever reason.
    10-11-2013 11:58 AM
  4. dang121's Avatar
    Again I reiterate: Google does not screw with Metrotube or other 3rd party providers. I am unsure why nobody considers that fact. This means to me that Google does not want to deny WP users, just that they want MS to play by the rules. And the fact that the platform is not ready, after TWO years, is whose fault?
    Again Metrotube and other 3rd party apps does not play by the rule either. They skips ads and let you download. The only different is they are not made by MS. Not sure you are a real WP user or some troll that talking out of his ***.
    10-11-2013 12:05 PM
  5. ImmortalWarrior's Avatar
    Again I reiterate: Google does not screw with Metrotube or other 3rd party providers. I am unsure why nobody considers that fact. This means to me that Google does not want to deny WP users, just that they want MS to play by the rules. And the fact that the platform is not ready, after TWO years, is whose fault?
    The problem is that they don't provide an API that allows MS to follow the rules.

    Let me break this down for you. YouTube serves up content that is rendered in your browser through the adobe flash plugin or HTML 5 standards.

    Adobe flash is prefered because it allows Google to insert advertisements - the flash plugin controls this on the client side. The problem is that the advertisements are not added to the video stream seamlessly on the server side.

    Because control of the advertisements is handed off to the flash plugin, that means that devices viewing videos without flash (html 5) are not going to display the advertisements. Just the video. If the advertisement was seamlessly integrated into the video stream then it would work. But that is not the case.

    Html doesn't have client side controls for advertisements either. So google is forced to create a server side solution for this. This is not optimal for them.

    So when a mobile device, such as WP8, connects and requests a video, YouTube recognizes that the device doesn't support flash and serves the video in html5. However, the html5 standard has no considerations for advertisements. Thus, when viewing a video on WP, you get no ads.

    YouTube needs to send the ad as html video first. They don't have a prominent solution for this currently. So they told MS they require ads to work. MS, recognizing the problem, tells google that they need API access for this. Google does not have a public API for ads and won't provide a private one for MS.

    So MS is left with three choices. Don't make an app, make an app with no ads, or spend an exorbitant amount of effort modifying how WP handles html5 and set the app up to "scrape" the ad feed and manually insert it into the attempt the play html 5 video.

    However, to do that MS would need to update the WP OS because this design is outside of the html5 standards which they have already coded support for.

    Then google cries foul and MS is left out to dry.
    Last edited by ImmortalWarrior; 10-11-2013 at 03:32 PM.
    10-11-2013 12:23 PM
  6. lantern20's Avatar
    And the fact that the platform is not ready, after TWO years, is whose fault?



    since ios & android don't use html5 for their apps, does that mean that they are not ready after how many years?





    Sent from my RM-824_nam_att_101 using Tapatalk
    10-11-2013 06:42 PM
  7. rdubmu's Avatar

    Are there no official Office apps on Android & iOS?

    ?



    Office is now available on both Android and iOS if you subscribe to office 365.





    Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk
    10-11-2013 08:18 PM
  8. MyNL822's Avatar
    Why is every company dropping Google in the first place? Apple dropped google maps and the YouTube app included on every phone. Of course, google made a YouTube app the next and a google maps app too. Google is just toying with Microsoft because they know they can have MS down on their knees sucking their _____. Microsoft just needs to go along with more of Google's plan and try to make things better for us. Just because Microsoft is dropping Google doesn't mean I need to drop google because I get a windows phone.
    10-11-2013 09:48 PM
  9. troylytle's Avatar
    The problem is that they don't provide an API that allows MS to follow the rules.

    Let me break this down for you. YouTube serves up content that is rendered in your browser through the adobe flash plugin or HTML 5 standards.

    Adobe flash is prefered because it allows Google to insert advertisements - the flash plugin controls this on the client side. The problem is that the advertisements are not added to the video stream seamlessly on the server side.

    Because control of the advertisements is handed off to the flash plugin, that means that devices viewing videos without flash (html 5) are not going to display the advertisements. Just the video. If the advertisement was seamlessly integrated into the video stream then it would work. But that is not the case.

    Html doesn't have client side controls for advertisements either. So google is forced to create a server side solution for this. This is not optimal for them.

    So when a mobile device, such as WP8, connects and requests a video, YouTube recognizes that the device doesn't support flash and serves the video in html5. However, the html5 standard has no considerations for advertisements. Thus, when viewing a video on WP, you get no ads.

    YouTube needs to send the ad as html video first. They don't have a prominent solution for this currently. So they told MS they require ads to work. MS, recognizing the problem, tells google that they need API access for this. Google does not have a public API for ads and won't provide a private one for MS.

    So MS is left with three choices. Don't make an app, make an app with no ads, or spend an exorbitant amount of effort modifying how WP handles html5 and set the app up to "scrape" the ad feed and manually insert it into the attempt the play html 5 video.

    However, to do that MS would need to update the WP OS because this design is outside of the html5 standards which they have already coded support for.

    Then google cries foul and MS is left out to dry.
    smart guy you are. I think they are idiots for not thinking of the revenue lost here. Regardless of whether or not we have an app to their standards we skip all ads. Suckers!
    10-11-2013 10:22 PM
  10. unstoppablekem's Avatar
    Office is now available on both Android and iOS if you subscribe to office 365.





    Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk
    What is the point of having 365 on your windows phone though, as it is built in already?
    10-12-2013 12:59 AM
  11. crash1989's Avatar
    In the end we consumers lose out no matter how we justify this stuff.

    Right now I am quite happy with YouTube apps on Windows Phone but the situation could turn out worse for third party apps.
    10-12-2013 01:44 AM
  12. ag1986's Avatar
    You know the market share argument is funny to me. The Nintendo Wii U which barely have any user but yet Google make a YT app for it. Overall, WP user is > Wii U user but no YT app. You can spin the argument any way you want, the bottom line is Google don't want to make a app for WP or support WP for whatever reason.
    That's an HTML5 third party app. Not a Google-made app, just one made using the API properly.
    10-12-2013 02:05 AM
  13. ag1986's Avatar
    I just jumped in after seeing this comment, so I'm not sure the entirety of this convo. That being said, metrotube and others also do not play by the rules. They skip ads, allow you to download and save videos, etc. Weren't these two of the few reasons that google denied Microsoft's YouTube app? I think it's more they want to make Microsoft look bad, which Microsoft is perfectly capable of doing on its own.
    Google doesn't have a history of going after small developers.

    There's a difference between a third party app which doesn't use the service's real name, made by an indie somewhere, and an app that looks like and claims to be an Official app made by a company like Microsoft. That is important.
    10-12-2013 02:07 AM
  14. ag1986's Avatar
    The problem is that they don't provide an API that allows MS to follow the rules.

    Let me break this down for you. YouTube serves up content that is rendered in your browser through the adobe flash plugin or HTML 5 standards.

    Adobe flash is prefered because it allows Google to insert advertisements - the flash plugin controls this on the client side. The problem is that the advertisements are not added to the video stream seamlessly on the server side.

    Because control of the advertisements is handed off to the flash plugin, that means that devices viewing videos without flash (html 5) are not going to display the advertisements. Just the video. If the advertisement was seamlessly integrated into the video stream then it would work. But that is not the case.

    Html doesn't have client side controls for advertisements either. So google is forced to create a server side solution for this. This is not optimal for them.

    So when a mobile device, such as WP8, connects and requests a video, YouTube recognizes that the device doesn't support flash and serves the video in html5. However, the html5 standard has no considerations for advertisements. Thus, when viewing a video on WP, you get no ads.

    YouTube needs to send the ad as html video first. They don't have a prominent solution for this currently. So they told MS they require ads to work. MS, recognizing the problem, tells google that they need API access for this. Google does not have a public API for ads and won't provide a private one for MS.

    So MS is left with three choices. Don't make an app, make an app with no ads, or spend an exorbitant amount of effort modifying how WP handles html5 and set the app up to "scrape" the ad feed and manually insert it into the attempt the play html 5 video.

    However, to do that MS would need to update the WP OS because this design is outside of the html5 standards which they have already coded support for.

    Then google cries foul and MS is left out to dry.
    You're completely wrong. The HTML5 API does all this with zero effort. You're just another MS apologist with no understanding of the technical issues here.
    10-12-2013 02:08 AM
  15. ag1986's Avatar
    since ios & android don't use html5 for their apps, does that mean that they are not ready after how many years?
    The relevant difference is that Chrome for Android and Safari iOS can support HTML5. WP cannot.
    10-12-2013 02:10 AM
  16. eugie's Avatar
    It is because Google want to have Google search engine built on windowsphone not just bing on search button options.. That's Google act like that but it's not a big problem..
    10-12-2013 02:20 AM
  17. SlimAndShady's Avatar
    Delete your Gmail, don't use google search, g+, YouTube, Google maps. Boycott google NOW!
    10-12-2013 02:24 AM
  18. Lurchorama's Avatar
    The relevant difference is that Chrome for Android and Safari iOS can support HTML5. WP cannot.
    Yes, but Google isnt *making* them use it.
    Thats the difference.
    10-12-2013 02:55 AM
  19. dang121's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurchorama View Post

    More correctly:

    "We're gonna make you re-create your app for our service in HTML5 even though we know your platform is not ready for it AND we're not making anyone else do it"
    "Well, thats a bit unfair"
    "Stiff s**t"
    "How long we got?"
    "Yesterday"
    "Well, thats REALLY unfair"
    <insert evil laugh here>

    Again I reiterate: Google does not screw with Metrotube or other 3rd party providers. I am unsure why nobody considers that fact. This means to me that Google does not want to deny WP users, just that they want MS to play by the rules. And the fact that the platform is not ready, after TWO years, is whose fault?

    Google doesn't have a history of going after small developers.

    There's a difference between a third party app which doesn't use the service's real name, made by an indie somewhere, and an app that looks like and claims to be an Official app made by a company like Microsoft. That is important.
    So in previous post you claim that there is third party app that exist and it play by Google rule and Google just want MS to play by the rule. In another post people pointed out that all third party app does not play by the rule. And you come back with "but it ok because Google does not goes after small developers". How do you change your story so fast or you just forgot your argument and everything is MS fault.
    10-13-2013 09:45 AM
  20. ImmortalWarrior's Avatar
    You're completely wrong. The HTML5 API does all this with zero effort. You're just another MS apologist with no understanding of the technical issues here.
    Completely wrong. Doubt it. Technically I could explain in detail, right down the the HTTP 1.1 or 2.0 transport protocol but it's inconsequential.

    Fact - the HTML 5 video standard does not include considerations for client side control of advertisements.

    Fact - advertisements can be made to work in HTML from the server side.

    Fact - advertisements can be handled by an app - native or HTML 5 - on the client side IF an API is provided to pull the ad videos. The client can then run the ads first.

    I am not familiar with the YouTube public API. However, my point is this:

    If a public API is available to get advertisements for video requests then why did Microsoft raise a stink about not having access to it? There are only these options for this situation:

    1.) The public API does NOT include a means to access content aware advertisements. If this is the case, Google would have to provide Private API access. If Google has provided this private API access for others and not for MS then Google is unnecessarily making this out to be a big deal. They have every right to withhold the private API access, but they shouldn't be whining if they are.

    2.) The public API does include a means to access content aware advertisements. If this is the case, Microsoft is incompetent and/or deliberately causing drama at the expense of their customers.

    I seriously doubt it's number 2.

    EDIT: I took the liberty of reading the Javascript and IFrame players APIs Google provides for YouTube. The Javascript API is specific to embedded Flash so the IFrame API is what we are looking for.

    Nowhere in the IFrame API documentation does it specify anything about advertisements, nor does it bother to include any sort of code reference on how to include or call up advertisements. The documentation shows that you are using the API to call up the video feed. That's it. This exactly supports what I previously stated.

    However, I know that won't be enough for you. So I dug some more. I know from experience in client server systems that, if the video stream is not made to include the add in the same stream from the server side, then the API must provide a way to respond to asynchronously posted information from the server. If it does, I can imagine a way in might allow the user to respond and display the appropriate advertisement prior to playing the requested video stream.

    I found something that the API uses that is close to that, but not the same. From the documentation:

    "The end user must be using a browser that supports the HTML5 postMessage feature. Most modern browsers support postMessage, though Internet Explorer 7 does not support it."

    HTML5 postMessage allows cross domain posts from IFrames. Cool. I can see how they might use that, but there is no end user code for them to use this it seems. It appears to be simply required by the embedded player for the browser. Unrelated to the ads it seems.

    So onward to addEventListener. If a message comes from the server to display an add there must be an event listener for it.

    https://developers.google.com/youtub...ference#Events

    None of those are related to advertisements. So we find ourselves back where I said we were in the first place. There is no client side control for advertisements in the public API. If I missed something, please feel free to check it yourself.

    Also, try to know what you are talking about before attempting to insult me.
    Last edited by ImmortalWarrior; 10-13-2013 at 11:11 PM.
    ag1986 and squire777 like this.
    10-13-2013 01:13 PM
  21. ag1986's Avatar
    Ah. Apologies for my tone.

    There is no need for client-side control for an ad to be played; have you seen Youtube ads playing before videos embedded on random third-party sites? This is basically the same thing. The app needs to include an HTML5 iframe within itself - the app can be on whatever framework you like. The request for a given video is passed to YT, and that is all the information they need - the ad is streamed followed by the video. Playing the app within the HTML5 iframe is what is essential. Try viewing an embedded HTML5 vid in IE on WP - it launches the native media player to handle the stream because IE is not capable of playing the video inline. The same would happen with an embedded iframe in an otherwise-native app. Verification:

    ""There is also an inherent behavior of Windows Phone where playback of an HTML5 video through a web page opens the built-in media player to host the video,"" -- Michael Choeung, Metrotube dev. Inside the bitter YouTube battle between Microsoft and Google | The Verge

    So. Google would definitely be able to serve ads to WP devices, but that is it. No other data about that ad view because the native player, unlike an HTML5 frame, is not capable of reporting any other data to Google. That's a problem because of the nature of Google's video ad offerings.

    They sell something called Trueview Instream, where if you skip the ad, the advertiser doesn't pay anything. If the ad is >30s long, that is. That's why the Skip Ad button on YT ads exists. They can't do this in the native player.

    Next up, Google reports not just number of times that video ad was viewed, but also percentage duration it was played. That is, it was played to 0-25% n0 times, 25-50% n1 times and so on. Again, native player does not report this and they are contractually bound to report this.

    These are the reasons why I believe that the problems with YT arise from a problem with WP8.
    10-15-2013 01:56 PM
  22. ImmortalWarrior's Avatar
    Makes sense, and thank you for the extra details.

    I understand the issue from Google's perspective, but there is one issue in regards to their demand for HTML5. The HTML5 video standard has no considerations for advertisements. Essentially, Google uses other HTML 5 features ("post message") and JavaScript to relay that information back to them. Neither MS nor Google have done anything wrong with their use of HTML 5 but the choices MS made make it so that client side metrics cannot be transmitted to Google.

    From Google's perspective, if they provided API capabilities for this, a native app could be made to send these metrics.

    Anyways, I suppose the point is that Google is making MS's choice for a better mobile video experience look like an intentional attempt to circumvent ads, and MS is right to bite back.

    On a side note, I've seen ads in my html5 videos from cbcnews on my Windows Phone. So it's entirely possible. Google is just mad that they can't get the metrics they want.
    10-16-2013 09:08 AM
  23. ag1986's Avatar
    Makes sense, and thank you for the extra details.

    I understand the issue from Google's perspective, but there is one issue in regards to their demand for HTML5. The HTML5 video standard has no considerations for advertisements. Essentially, Google uses other HTML 5 features ("post message") and JavaScript to relay that information back to them. Neither MS nor Google have done anything wrong with their use of HTML 5 but the choices MS made make it so that client side metrics cannot be transmitted to Google.

    From Google's perspective, if they provided API capabilities for this, a native app could be made to send these metrics.

    Anyways, I suppose the point is that Google is making MS's choice for a better mobile video experience look like an intentional attempt to circumvent ads, and MS is right to bite back.

    On a side note, I've seen ads in my html5 videos from cbcnews on my Windows Phone. So it's entirely possible. Google is just mad that they can't get the metrics they want.
    Yup, and they do have contractual obligations to report those numbers back to whoever's paying. More important IMHO is that the content creators will not be paid their share if TrueView skip metrics especially are not reported correctly.

    I agree that this is a hack to get around HTML5's limitations on Google's part, but the lack of inline video in IE is also an issue MS should fix. I would not call it an intentional attempt to circumvent ads too, but I was disgusted that they made it look as if the entire issue was Google's fault, that's all. This kind of slimy tactic is what makes me not want to use MS.

    CBCnews possibly doesn't use Google's video ads system, so that's not truly related to the issue at hand.

    One last question - how do you think this improves the mobile video experience? I really haven't used my NL920 much for video so I'm not sure.
    10-16-2013 09:41 AM
  24. ImmortalWarrior's Avatar

    One last question - how do you think this improves the mobile video experience? I really haven't used my NL920 much for video so I'm not sure.
    I think the ability to have the videos all managed through the native WP8 player improves the experience. Videos can't auto run for instance and you will never get stuck with that webpage that has a hidden video playing.

    However, it would be nice to have the option to play in-line as well.
    10-17-2013 06:49 AM
49 12

Similar Threads

  1. GDR2/Amber update for AT&T L920 abroad
    By orangesplease in forum Nokia Lumia 920
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-11-2013, 10:34 AM
  2. Regarding the awful Cnet 1020 review.........
    By Jcmg62 in forum Nokia Lumia 1020
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-10-2013, 03:46 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-10-2013, 12:24 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD