Comments on: Flowplayer: Open Source Flash Video Player For Your Website

By: VideoPro

VideoPro — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 01:19:42 +0000

@Skip – Thanks for posting the link to the free player. I am sure it is free for commercial use and you do have to register your email, but it looks pretty cool.

By: VideoPro

VideoPro — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 01:15:15 +0000

@Jasil – You should probably post your inquiry at the Flowplayer forums (http://flowplayer.org/forum/index.html)

By: Jasil

Jasil — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 05:27:39 +0000

Hi ..

Am just trying to integrate flowplayer and yume ad services .. where can i get yume plugin for flow player. Is thr any tutorial availabale

Thnks
Jasil

By: Skip

Skip — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:35:38 +0000

An alternative is BitGravity’s free Flash player which take a few seconds to set up, allows you to alter numerous parameters with a simple interface, and best of all it’s free.

http://player.bitgravity.com

By: Mediatvguy

Mediatvguy — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:32:44 +0000

I am also debating which one to buy. I have used both and it seems like Flowplayer is more customizable than JW. Albeit is harder but I am by trade a programmer so it doesn’t bother me. I also think that JW performs better, but there are major limitations on formatting playlists. Plus creating a dynamic playlist (I.E. from a database) is nearly impossible. You need a separate file for JW whereas in Flowplayer the playlist is in your HTML file. I agree with you that a full comparison i in order

By: VideoPro

VideoPro — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:13:52 +0000

Scott – You make some really good points. If you use the JW Player on any type of commercial site, you will have to purchase a license. Currently the license cost is 30 Euros. I am not sure where you are seeing 1,000+ Euros? The 30 Euro license supports up to 5,000,000 plays per month on a single domain which is more than enough for all but the most high traffic sites out there. They are also asking that you do not create any of your own modications to support ads. The license clearly states that any of these conditions may be waived with permission from them. Additionally, they offer plugins for Double Click DART, YuMe, and the Long Tail Ad Solution which “allows you to embed any ad tag from any ad network into your website’s media player.” IMHO, these conditions are not very restrictive considering what you get in return and at this time I would still recommend this player for most people looking to easily add video to their sites.

I think it is really important for anyone considering either player to compare each one and choose the right one for their project. I have nothing against the Flowplayer and I love the fact that it is open source. A full comparison of both players is in order.

By: scott

scott — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:32:16 +0000

You will need a commerical license with the JW Player if you plan to monetize your videos in any way with advertising unless you use the JW longtail ad service. The commercial license is very expensive!!! (1,000+ euros per year depending on your volume). that is why I am choosing Flowplayer. they are CDN agnostic (JW longtail owns a cdn), advertising agnostic (jw longtail has an ad service). Flowplayer does one thing – makes great video players and relys on the cdn and ad sales partners to do the rest. And Flowplayer is open source. I’ve used both and Flowplayer is the way to go in my mind.

By: VideoPro

VideoPro — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:58:28 +0000

Mahalie, Thanks for your comment. I have been meaning to do some further testing. JW just released version 4 and I am sure that FlowPlayer has matured since I last used it. One thing I didn’t like with FlowPlayer is that they gave too many JavaScript options and I could not get fullscreen playback working correctly. Also, the large watermark in the free version didn’t help either.

One area where the JW Player really shines is that it is widely supported and there are dozens of plugins for open source web applications that really make it a breeze to use. If you do a comparison, please let us know your results. Also, if you are interested in being a guest author, that would be great.

By: mahalie

mahalie — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:59:44 +0000

Have you tested JW FLV Media player and FlowPlayer for performance? Branding aside, the JW player just seems clunkier – I am about to do side-by-side testing to see for sure.

I’ve investigated FlowPlayer and I will say they do a great job documenting, it’s very easy to use and it looks very professional. If you are doing this for a client or a business $99 to remove branding doesn’t seem out of line to me…