I want to add Youtube Player for android to play youtube video, so I want to know following things.
What is the daily limit of videos I can play.
If playing videos is paid then what is the cost of it.
I have gone different places but not received any exact answers for my questions, my requirement is only to play youtube videos in my android app
with the help of Youtubeplayer library.
Related
I've built a webapp to host low-res proxies of our teams video files. The webapp is primarily for tagging and searching video. Additionally, I'd like to be able to play a random playlist of clips on TVs around the office. I've implemented this by "Casting Tab" to a Chromecast, and it works fine.
However, now I'm running up against the bandwidth limitations of my host. Latency and everything is fine, but to run a single TV's 2.5Mbps stream 8hrs a day for 23 days a month comes to about 207 GB/month, 20% of my alotted 1TB monthly transfer.
How can i build something that will "cache" these clips client-side, so that it doesnt re-download them unnecessarily? There are about 1000 clips. I'd prefer to keep it connected to my webapp via browser or some API endpoint so the RAND() stream of clips is constantly updated as people add to it.
Note: I asked a related question yesterday, and it seemed to fix my specific issue, but it doesn't seem to have worked at scale, so I'm broadening the approach a bit. Browser Caching of images and videos served via php query strings
Shaka Player has built-in support for offline playback, along with a pretty good API for listing offline assets, and removing them again.
This would require that you have your videos in MPEG-DASH format. Luckily Google also has a tool available for that. Shaka Packager can take your mp4's and package them for MPEG-DASH, provided the MP4's follow some simple requirements.
You could probably build something yourself using similar mechanisms to the Shaka Player, but it seems much easier to use Shaka for doing it.
Looking at the Google Play Services documentation, it doesn't say specifically whether an app has to have been downloaded from Google Play to use Google Play services or InApp purchasing.
Unfortunately virtually all my 200-400 a day free game app downloads are from sites like 'APKMonk' that download apk files directly without using Google Play (and don't ask permission for this). I get maybe 5 or 6 Google Play downloads a day, about 2% of the downloads, as I can't afford spending a load to Google to advertise and getting the download numbers for their top lists is practically impossible for independent developers otherwise.
Google Analytics and Admob serves have been working with these rogue downloads, but I'm getting no InApp purchases, even for free promo items, and very few leaderboard and achievement posts (12 leaderboard posts out of thousands of rogue downloads so far).
Is this because they didn't download from Google Play in the first place? Should I add a message to uninstall their apps and reinstall from Google Play?
It doesn't matter where they have been downloaded from.
For inApp purchases, it only matters whether they have Google play installed on their device.
I have several YouTube videos embedded on my website. I'm using the Jquery youtubeplaylist.js to load and play the movies. I recently noticed that the videos on my website stall and stutter occasionally. If I watch the same videos directly through YouTube then the videos load quickly and play smoothly.
Could it be the youtubeplaylist script that is causing the slow down? Or, could it be the fact that I am loading the video in at a custom size?
Also, does YouTube give preference to the videos played directly on their site?
I've seen the same problem, but there are too many variables to know for sure. It's clear that the nocookie player that loads from youtube-nocookie loads much slower than the regular player. Google has likely devoted fewer resources to this version of the player, probably because it garners less revenue to make up for the cost of serving video. Using the regular player, things do appear to be slower at times outside of YouTube, but that could be purely coincidental.
Having shared hosting or not shouldn't matter, since as you note the video stream is directly between Google's servers and the user's browser.
Recently I started developing an app which contains the provision to play the youtube videos. Initially I thought it may be an easier task, and later I realized that it is not going to be an easy one. My all other works related to that apps are over and the only pending work is youtube integration. Can any one please help me to complete this. Or send me some useful links that help me for integrating with youtube.
These previous answers may help you:
YouTube on Windows Phone with MediaElement
How to launch a YouTube URL on Windows Phone 7
Basically, it looks like currently you can't embed videos within your app, but you can (with some url kludging) launch the external viewer as long as the user has installed the youTube app.
I am asking this question on SO because a similar question was asked here and migrated to SuperUser, but the answers it got there were more about screen sharing than hosting screencasts. I'm hoping that some of you have faced (and solved) this issue before...
My team is putting together a bunch of technical screencasts, and we are currently hosting them ourselves. We would much prefer to host them externally, to take advantage of a bigger pipe, geographically distributed data centers, and better uptime.
The screencasts are typically less than 10 minutes.
Is there a programmer-centric screencast hosting solution? Would you recommend YouTube? Vimeo? Something else?
Since Jon's answer two years ago, there have been a few additions to the screencast market:
Screencast.com, by TechSmith. The makers of Snagit, Camtasia, and Jing have a place where you can host your Screencasts at any resolution. It's not as straightforward as Screenr, but it provides you many options to upload your videos. You can upload by file or directly from Snagit 11, Jing (Free), or Camtasia.
YouTube and Vimeo (Pro) continue to be good options if you're looking for a hosting platform and they now both support a large range of HD formats as well as supporting HTML5. The drawback (or benefit?) is that your video is going to be converted to their playback resolution(s) rather than your source resolution. Snagit 11 will even upload directly to YouTube now.
Screencast.com seems like a good option if your main concern is recording screencasts on the fly and getting them uploaded quickly.
YouTube and Vimeo are probably better choices if you want your videos to be visible to the widest possible audience.
While Vimeo is more of a professional site, YouTube offers HTML5 / H.264 video playback support for all videos, so they'll play on iPhone. Vimeo currently doesn't support that on user videos, and is planning on adding it as a pro feature in the future.
If you are really concerned about 1-to-1 pixel resolution in your screencast, Vimeo Pro is not the best choice. My files had an exact 1920 to 1080 resolution and I exported them from Screenflow in "lossless". It appeared very crisp on the Mac in Quicktime Player, but after uploading to Vimeo Pro, turning HD "on", I could not read the details.
Vimeo is quick, but they have a compression good for movie scenes, but bad for small computer screen fonts. I am trying screencast.com since they leave the file "as is".
Personally, I prefer to see videos on something like Vimeo rather than YouTube or a similar site. Vimeo has a certain air of professionalism about it while still be convenient and user-friendly. Also, you can put embedded videos on your support pages if you wish or simply link to the videos in FAQs or forums. It makes it very convenient. Again though, this is just MHO.
A popular modern option is Wistia. They are more expensive than say Vimeo, but they have excellent tools for collecting emails and for analyzing how well your videos are doing. Basically they are hosting combined with video marketing.
I decided to go with them for my indie-hacker screencasts site.