Wow... I didnt know it was that bad for people who moved over to the latest Version of Vidblaster. what changed ? I know Brian Brushwood was a big supporter of Vidblaster.
Printable View
Wow... I didnt know it was that bad for people who moved over to the latest Version of Vidblaster. what changed ? I know Brian Brushwood was a big supporter of Vidblaster.
Tommy,
I am glad you can see things clearly. I agree 100 percent that it does look like Mike is trying to screw his paying customers by trying to make it look like VidBlaster is less expensive than it is if you follow the licensing to the letter of the law (as you should). Plus, getting "infractions" and being banned from a support group that should be there to provide a place to discuss the product pre and post sale just does not make sense at all.
Ultimately, there are only so many people that need video switcher software and the more people you alienate the less future sales you will have. It is just like many of those restaurants that have been featured on Kitchen Nightmares. Once their reputation is shot, people stop coming and they have to close their doors. Good customer service goes a long way to getting future sales and keeping the business going for the long haul.
- Brian
Ammon...WC has two licence points essentially. http://www.telestream.net/wirecast/compare.htm The $500.00 has limits on the feature sets. Some of the things that you can do in the $500 version of VB you can't do in WC Studio and visa versa. VB has 4 price points. The feature sets available are limited by the level of licence you buy. Essentially it a similar approach. Where the difference is that VB also is offered as a named user licence or a concurrent model and wirecast is simply concurrent. I am not certain on the upper limit of shots in WC. I haven't seen them but the Studio version does not allow scoreboards, IP cameras, virtual sets etc that you can do in VB Pro.
WC then charges a yearly fee for "premium" support. VB doesn't.
When you say that you are using WC to encode you are really saying that you have stopped using FMLE. You are still using VB to output to WC.
The vMix model is similar to VB in that there are restrictions on the Inputs(modules) and resolution at the different price points. The product however is much cheaper at each price point than both VB and WC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewSeabrook
Andrew.... i don't think you understand what you're talking about. Going into a forum and being banned and yelled at is not support. The virtual set thing is not true either. VB has no support for virtual set at all, where as in WC (even studio) you can build a virtual set with layers.
Andrew The "Premium" support is for phone call support. I do not see how that is a negative.. Does Vidblaster offer the ability to call and get one on one support?
Clarifying a few things regarding Wirecast.
You can have Wirecast actively licensed on two systems at the same time. You can easily move the licenses from machine to machine as needed (wait about 15 minutes for deactivation/reactivation)
This means you can have a backup system up and running at the same time if one system should go down. For some this is a must in a professional streaming environment.
Also these two system can even be different OSs, one on Mac one on Windows at the same time.
This also allows you to take advantage of OS specific features. For example, on Mac you can record to Apple ProRes which is good for post workflow. On Windows you can record to WMV and stream MMS.
VidBlaster limits upload to 1mbps unless one goes to Broadcast version (30mbps) which is nearly $2K for Single license and nearly $6K for Desktop License. Wirecast has no limit even at $495 (and see licensing above). This also means it's easy to do a 720 stream in Wirecast in the base priced version.
Note that Ustream and YouTube have Wirecast versions that are limited to their services at much lower prices starting at free.
As per Joe's comments yes, even if you're only streaming at a standard def frame size you may be recording at 720 or 1080 for post workflow for VOD use.
Wirecast streams to multiple servers with the $495 version whereas VidBlaster requires Broadcast.
You'll probably see more features at the same price points when Wirecast 5 arrives very soon.
Premium support is an optional addition which not only includes phone support but remote access so support can login to your system to help troubleshoot. Email support is also expedited.
Regarding sports, Wirecast Windows can integrate with Xos Digital Thundercloud live scoreboard service.
There's no "module" limit. As many shots as your system can handle each can be 7 layers deep and with 5 additional Master Layers.
Don't underestimate the important of built in x264 encoding and its ability to customize so you can use a single computer for both switching and live streaming without overrunning the CPU resources.
I like to look at Telestream the same way I look at apple with certain features. Other companies may be first to implement features, but like Apple, Telestream does it best and RIGHT! Virtual Camera out. Perfect example. Telestream doesn't cease to amaze me with the innovation level. Love them, hate them, but they are ballers and you have to except it! There is a reason people flock to buy the software. Because it is reliable, and I will say no software is perfect, but I will say, if I was planning a big event, and my job depended on it, Telestream would be my choice over VidBlaster. Which is why I've used it in many ways over the last 5 years. We can sit and debate until the cows come home. But I would like to say, if you don't know the software, don't compare it. Meaning I see a lot of "Wirecast can't do this and vidblaster can." I would like to challenge your statement and say your wrong. Get the facts before comparing. This is why people are improperly informed.Quote:
Originally Posted by TomSinclair
I can see that VidBlaster had a strong feature set that Wirecast didn't support for some time.
VB had virtual camera out and live thumbnails for a long time before Wirecast.
Wirecast's live thumbnails allow control of the frame rate or can be disable to lower CPU use.
Wirecast is adding RTMPT/RTSP/MMS/HTTP support through its WebStream plugin in Wirecast 5.
VidBlaster's Advanced Chroma is very good and replay is also a nice feature.
Telestream may be slower to add those features but they're also working cross platform.
Regarding company resources, Wirecast was originally just a couple of guys with a small company Varasoft. Telestream bought them and added supporting resources so the coders could focus on just that rather than running every aspect of a company. In those early days Wirecast was Mac only and Quicktime only (no Flash). Telestream is the key reason for Wirecast's feature growth.
While Mike V has done a lot on his own perhaps it's time that he consider going the Varasoft route and look for a buyer to expand the company. At the very least CombiTech may need partners to grow. He may need to consider hiring support staff.
CseeMan,
I agree that it would be best for Mike V to look at selling off VidBlaster to a company that can handle customers professionally and courteously. From everything I have read, it sounds like he does not like to deal with people and probably has Asperger Syndrome and an Introvert. While he may not like to work for someone else, it would be much better for VidBlaster as a solution. This way he could go back to being a programmer and not have to worry about sales and marketing. While it is great to run your own company. It does take a special kind of person who can make it work well. At the end, Mike V needs to do what is best for him.
- Brian
Tom Sinclair offers that to those who buy from him. But that is by no means a "company" policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by oscarmartz
