Regarding hosting video content on Amazon Cloudfront, it appears in the Cloudfront documentation that for streaming video they support only RTMP:
CloudFront uses Adobe Flash Media Server 3.5 to stream on-demand content with Adobe's Real-Time Messaging Protocol (RTMP). CloudFront accepts RTMP requests over port 1935 and port 80. CloudFront supports the following variants of the RTMP protocol: • RTMP—Adobe's Real-Time Message Protocol • RTMPT—Adobe streaming tunneled over HTTP • RTMPE—Adobe encrypted • RTMPTE—Adobe encrypted tunneled over HTTP
I don't see how that does me any good since Roku documentation states:
The only way to deliver live content on the Roku is to use HTTP Live Streaming (HLS). Video on Demand (VOD) can be delivered via HLS, mp4, and wmv container files.
I currently use Amazon s3, most of my video files right now are around 150 MB, which seems to cause some slow loading issues. Has anyone gotten around this problem or could you recommend a similar amazon or other low cost service provider. I have found that the amazon s3 is very inexpensive.
Whatever you do, don't use a Dropbox FREE account to host files.They will suspend activity if you reach 10GB of bandwidth in a day (the cap for paid accounts is 250GB/day.) Maybe this is already well known, but I feel like an idiot!
We were using this method for testing, then as soon as the channel went public it crashed the Dropbox. We had to then scramble to get everything up and running and move to another server, now we have to wait for the update on the Public Channel to roll-out.
Free 24/7 Metal radio via web or smartphone www.koshermetal.com
"koshermetal" wrote: Whatever you do, don't use a Dropbox FREE account to host files.They will suspend activity if you reach 10GB of bandwidth in a day (the cap for paid accounts is 250GB/day.)
Thanks for that update. I saw you were using Dropbox while your channel was private, and started looking at Dropbox's TOS myself. My one client (friend) wanted to stream his YouTube band channel via the Roku. In fact, I referred him to you after I would not be able to deliver. YouTube's TOS nixed that idea. We even looked at Amazon S3 and even that would put him over budget.
As mentioned in the other posts, Amazon S3 is what I have been recommending to a few small clients if they can afford it.
Please continue to post your findings on low cost providers. I have a few "starving artists" waiting.