Akamai Acknowledges It's Not Delivering HD Video to the iPhone

Earlier in the month, during Akamai's (AKAM) webcast about their HD network, Tim Siglin pointed out on his blog that Akamai's claim that they could deliver HD video to the iPhone (AAPL) wasn't accurate. Tim had a lot of back and forth emails with Akamai, which he documents on his blog here, and I questioned Akamai on the same topic with a post entitled "Does The iPhone Support HD Video? I Say No. Akamai Says Yes".

Friday, at the Streaming Media Europe show in London, Tim reported that Akamai has changed their stance on the subject and now acknowledges that they are not delivering HD video to the iPhone. From Tim's blog post:

[Akamai's Suzanne Johnson, who will be appearing on my panel at Streaming Media Europe 2009 later today, has confirmed that a more accurate version of Tom Leighton's "45 million iPhones capable of playing HD content" statement should have been stated as this:

"By year's end, as part of the Akamai HD Network, up to 45 million iPhones and iPod touches will be capable of displaying high-quality video encoded from HD source content."

She also stated that Akamai understand that "the iPhone does not display true HD by definition but can offer consumers an HD-like high quality video experience that complements what they get on TV."]

I think it is important Akamai has changed their stance on this as HD quality video is very important to the future of all companies involved in the online video space as well as how it is defined. We need to keep the standards that we think of with broadcast HD quality to be the same when talking about online video so there is no confusion as to what's HD, and what isn't.

While it's good to see Akamai acknowledge that they aren't delivering HD video to the iPhone, I'd like to see Akamai define what they consider to be "HD quality" when they are talking about delivering "HD quality" video across their network. I still can't find any definition of this by Akamai on their HD Network product page.

Comments

[bcncv:]

I think this is parsing words a little too finely. Ever since it was launched, it was clear (at least to me) that they were taking HD source content and displaying it on non-HD devices.

I'm no HD expert, but it seems fairly obvious what you are and are not getting. I see your point on their marketing claims, but I also think you're splitting hairs on the details.

Oct 18 02:53 PM

[wobatus:]

File this under BFD. The I-Phone can't deliver HD would be more accurate.

Oct 19 07:50 AM

[wobatus:]

I love the fact that I make a true statement and it gets a negative rec.

Oct 19 10:16 AM

[Mio Babic:]

Natively it is impossible to display HD resolutions on iPhone which has a max screen resolution of 480x320 (video encoded in max resolution of 640x480, 30 frames of second). HD resolutions are 1280x720 (720p) and 1920x1080(1080i/p) and they cannot be displayed on iPhone.

In fact, HD video is defined with three major parameters:
1) Frame Size, which is stated in pixels and defines the number of horizontal pixels times (x) vertical pixels (i.e., 1280x720 or 1920x1080).
2) Scanning System, which is identified as progressive scanning (p), or interlaced scanning (i), and
3) Frame Rate, which is identified as a number of frames per second.

Essentially, even if HD source is used to create the output video played on iPhone, at max bitrate of 1.5Mbps using iPhone HTTP adaptive streaming, we still end up with 400x224 video. With that in mind it might be helpful to clearly define what would qualify as HD video on the web and also set web standards for different devices (desktop vs. mobile vs. portable devices).

Dan, I’m not sure how do we approach the mobile space (i.e., iPhone and soon Android and others) in terms of what would, if anything, qualify as HD experience on these types of devices? Perhaps you and Tim could help with this process?

Oct 19 10:46 AM

[tibidabo:]

i think Kit Digital have some devepments in that area

Oct 19 02:17 PM

[tibidabo:]

i think Kit Digital have some developments in that area

Oct 19 02:17 PM

[Kanman:]

Dan's not really interested in furthering HD content delivery debate. This is more of his one-man-war against Akamai. Dan, it must be tough being so bitter. I hope you don't own a cat.

Oct 19 05:31 PM

[Dan Rayburn:]

@ Kanman: This is all about furthering the HD debate, I am the one who is saying we need to stick to the broadcast standard. I am the one starting the debate. You didn't even say what you think the standard should be.

Oct 19 10:00 PM

[evrslr:]

The real win here for the consumer is that Akamai is providing access (via their network *to* iPhones) to a vast source of quality programming.

HD. Not HD. 1x1... 1M x 1M... whatever... consumers love the iPhone... consumers want content... content... content...

This all makes Akamai a *huge* winner. Business 101.

Oct 20 09:42 AM

[User 502432:]

Thanks for the heads up. I just called up my local television station and told them off. They claim they're broadcasting the games in HD, but no matter where I turn the knob on my tv, I still get a fuzzy picture. I can't believe they'd make such an outrageous claim. I don't know why I used that coupon to get this dumb converter box.

Oct 20 11:30 AM

[Kanman:]

Alright, I even gave you a + vote for that one. It's not technically HD.

But, were missing the forest for the trees here. Akam is providing a higher platform of delivery... that's what their whole system is about. We can debate the finer points of what constitutes HD all day long. As a believer (and investor) in Akamai, it's just great that they are helping to deliver content better and faster. And not to worry, they will be helping the deliver high def sooner or later. If you'd like to call them for jumping the gun a bit... that's fair, but basically small potatoes in the long run. Just my opinion.


On Oct 19 10:00 PM Dan Rayburn wrote:

> @ Kanman: This is all about furthering the HD debate, I am the one
> who is saying we need to stick to the broadcast standard. I am the
> one starting the debate. You didn't even say what you think the standard
> should be.

Oct 20 04:16 PM

[Jonha's Pop:]

Dan, are you starting to 'get the feeling' that readers here are unto your game ? Why anyone from Akamai would sit in the same room, let alone on the same panel with you, is beyond imagination. Poor Suzane Johnson. One can only imagine, what it is she did to deserve this opportunity. Her days with the firm could be numbered. On second thought, Akamai isn't that low-down.

Oct 20 05:17 PM

[Dan Rayburn:]

If by "my game" you mean reporting with is actually taking place, with factual information, then yes, I do hope readers are getting that.

Oct 20 10:02 PM