April 26, 1999
Streaming audio battle should be a screamer
By Bob O'Donnell
One of the many promises of the Internet is that it's supposed to revolutionize not
only how we get information for business purposes, but also how we're entertained. The
Web, in particular, is supposed to provide us with a wider variety of audio, video, and
other sources of entertainment than any cable system or other delivery mechanism can hope
to provide.
At the moment, this is still more of a pipe dream than a reality, particularly for
video files. The bandwidth and compression quality required for usable,
"watchable" video is still a long way off. Audio on the Internet, however, is
another story. There are a number of very useful and, indeed, entertaining audio resources
available on the Net, both for business-related informational purposes and entertainment.
The problem now facing audio on the Net, however, is a proliferation of incompatible
standards. RealNetworks' RealAudio format became a de facto standard early on, but after
the company's splintering with Microsoft, as well as the grass-roots success of the MP3
format, its hold on the market has loosened considerably. Combine this with the copyright
concerns being voiced by the multibillion dollar entertainment industry, and it doesn't
seem terribly surprising that audio standards on the Web are a mess.
At issue are probably billions of dollars of potential revenue, as well as control over
how any audio standard is developed: two plum prizes. Given that, it's also not surprising
how many companies, initiatives, and standards are currently angling for the prizes. In
addition to RealAudio and MP3, there's also LiquidAudio, Microsoft's recently updated
Advanced Streaming Format, and a new Lucent standard called EPAC, to name but a few.
Each of the formats is boasted as having higher quality and/or better compression rates
than the others, but the differences that I've heard are pretty subtle, if not
indistinguishable. Plus, each of the formats is constantly being improved, particularly as
the competition has become more intense. Ultimately, I'm afraid, it's going to be a game
of power politics that determines who wins this battle. And given the size of some of the
competitors, you can probably guess who will come out on top.
The only potentially interesting twist is the grass-roots support of MP3. Given the
still-anarchic nature of the Internet in general, it's never a good idea to bet against a
popular standard. (In fact, much of the Internet's current structure and standards are
based more on popularity than anything else.) As a result, there's a good chance that MP3
may still survive, particularly if an upgraded version of the format improves its audio
quality and supports the record industry's forthcoming Secure Digital Music Initiative --
which provides copyright protection by preventing unauthorized copies from being made. At
the recent Internet World trade show, I was told both efforts are under way, so the
question will be how quickly they can be implemented vs. how quickly the other standards
can make a foothold.
Once again, the bottom line with all of these competing audio standards is yet another
example of companies putting their own individual agendas ahead of the users' interests.
Thankfully, many of the popular audio player applications are adding support for many of
these different standards, which makes things a bit easier. Still, it may be a while
before we can listen to any audio source we come across on the Internet without having to
worry about what format it's in and whether we have the right software to hear it. And
that is too bad.
©
Copyright 1999, by InfoWorld Publishing Corp., a
subsidiary of IDG Communications, Inc. Reprinted from InfoWorld,
155 Bovet Road, San Mateo, CA 94402. Further reproduction is prohibited.
