Me !!!

Yes, please.

Bohemian67 said:

Mars23 said:

I would, but IF the shows go elsewhere, it diminishes the value. People have already seen the show, or are not willing to pay high ticket prices, presuming the online price would be less.

Streaming the last show of a tour would make more sense.

Good post. I agree. But the quality should be good.

With the advances that Adobe is making with it's Flash Media Server For Streaming Video family of products...quality could actually be great. Even on a Smart Phone.

http://www.adobe.com/prod...diaserver/

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

Bohemian67 said:

Good post. I agree. But the quality should be good.

With the advances that Adobe is making with it's Flash Media Server For Streaming Video family of products...quality could actually be great. Even on a Smart Phone.

http://www.adobe.com/prod...diaserver/

No flash. I think we got to put that baby to rest. It has to be html5

I would pay (within reason) for that! A pay-per-view live concert is a great idea, just look how well lovesexy 88 went down

V10LETBLUES said:

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

With the advances that Adobe is making with it's Flash Media Server For Streaming Video family of products...quality could actually be great. Even on a Smart Phone.

http://www.adobe.com/prod...diaserver/

No flash. I think we got to put that baby to rest. It has to be html5

If you're talking about on Smart Phones, I do agree with you but only to a certain extent because I have a 'Droid X' which uses the Android 2.2 operating system. My phone has full Flash functionality. While there is a greater percentage of other phones that rely on HTML5-capable WebKit browsers. Consideration has to be given to the fact that the Android 2.2 o.s. has only legitmately been available since September or October

If you're talking about as far as streaming video on the internet itself, HTML5 is a long, long way off from being the standard because it's <video> tag isn't codec specific. So most end user browsers make the video unavailable. Unless of course, the developer incorporates Flash, which readily is available across all browsers.

I know Steve Jobs would like people to believe that HTML5 is the end all...of all Flash...but don't believe the hype...just yet.

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

V10LETBLUES said:

No flash. I think we got to put that baby to rest. It has to be html5

If you're talking about on Smart Phones, I do agree with you but only to a certain extent because I have a 'Droid X' which uses the Android 2.2 operating system. My phone has full Flash functionality. While there is a greater percentage of other phones that rely on HTML5-capable WebKit browsers. Consideration has to be given to the fact that the Android 2.2 o.s. has only legitmately been available since September or October

If you're talking about as far as streaming video on the internet itself, HTML5 is a long, long way off from being the standard because it's <video> tag isn't codec specific. So most end user browsers make the video unavailable. Unless of course, the developer incorporates Flash, which readily is available across all browsers.

I know Steve Jobs would like people to believe that HTML5 is the end all...of all Flash...but don't believe the hype...just yet.

I know this is getting way off topic, but I have a Droid X too. Battery life and performance suffers with flash, and the phone can toast bread in seconds. It is the reason most handsets do not offer it. I have flash disabled most of the time. The Droid is not my primary phone. The battery will only last a good 4 hrs on a good day.

But besides phones I have flash disabled on my laptop too. It's the same thing.

The longer we nurse this technological cripple , the longer it will take to get rid of it all together. The only reason its is still around is because it became so commonplace, like the odd friend we cannot muster to tell to take a hike. We must stop the flash cycle and get html5 more readily accepted and improved.

I hear they are working on a lot of the flash issues, but I think it's too late.

[Edited 12/26/10 10:24am]

V10LETBLUES said:

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

If you're talking about on Smart Phones, I do agree with you but only to a certain extent because I have a 'Droid X' which uses the Android 2.2 operating system. My phone has full Flash functionality. While there is a greater percentage of other phones that rely on HTML5-capable WebKit browsers. Consideration has to be given to the fact that the Android 2.2 o.s. has only legitmately been available since September or October

If you're talking about as far as streaming video on the internet itself, HTML5 is a long, long way off from being the standard because it's <video> tag isn't codec specific. So most end user browsers make the video unavailable. Unless of course, the developer incorporates Flash, which readily is available across all browsers.

I know Steve Jobs would like people to believe that HTML5 is the end all...of all Flash...but don't believe the hype...just yet.

I know this is getting way off topic, but I have a Droid X too. Battery life and performance suffers with flash, and the phone can toast bread in seconds. It is the reason most handsets do not offer it. I have flash disabled most of the time. The Droid is not my primary phone. The battery will only last a good 4 hrs on a good day.

But besides phones I have flash disabled on my laptop too. It's the same thing.

The longer we nurse this technological cripple , the longer it will take to get rid of it all together. The only reason its is still around is because it became so commonplace, like the odd friend we cannot muster to tell to take a hike. We must stop the flash cycle and get html5 more readily accepted and improved.

I hear they are working on a lot of the flash issues, but I think it's too late.

[Edited 12/26/10 10:24am]

To each his/her own. My Droid X works great. There is not a phone battery on the market that will last longer than 4 hours, if you're playing videos on them without the phone being plugged in.

I do like HTML5, I'm not knocking it but as of right now, it is just not ready to stand on it's own yet, as a standard. Sometime in the not so distant future? Maybe.

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

V10LETBLUES said:

I know this is getting way off topic, but I have a Droid X too. Battery life and performance suffers with flash, and the phone can toast bread in seconds. It is the reason most handsets do not offer it. I have flash disabled most of the time. The Droid is not my primary phone. The battery will only last a good 4 hrs on a good day.

But besides phones I have flash disabled on my laptop too. It's the same thing.

The longer we nurse this technological cripple , the longer it will take to get rid of it all together. The only reason its is still around is because it became so commonplace, like the odd friend we cannot muster to tell to take a hike. We must stop the flash cycle and get html5 more readily accepted and improved.

I hear they are working on a lot of the flash issues, but I think it's too late.

[Edited 12/26/10 10:24am]

To each his/her own. My Droid X works great. There is not a phone battery on the market that will last longer than 4 hours, if you're playing videos on them without the phone being plugged in.

I do like HTML5, I'm not knocking it but as of right now, it is just not ready to stand on it's own yet, as a standard. Sometime in the not so distant future? Maybe.

No it seems to be a common thing for for the X without even using them but for calls, and most android phones too, but the larger screen ones more so. I keep my home most of the time. My old fashioned BB Bold stays on with me all day long.

Anyway. A big yes for online concerts.

[Edited 12/26/10 14:30pm]

I would pay maybe $15 to watch a show online - provided it was decent quality. But I'd prefer to pay $30 for a Blue-Ray/DVD release that I could keep and watch anytime...

I live in Rio de Janeiro. Last time Prince was here was in 91. So, the streaming is a good idea...

But I´d rather BUY an official DVD in a store. It´s almost 10 years since his last official one.