Can the Steam Deck succeed?
I’ve not yet had my hands onto this new Valve bad boy of a handheld, but I still want to give my first impressions of this device with its base $399 price tag. Let’s explore.
Handhelds in Gaming
Before I jump into my opinion of Valve’s new Steam Deck, let’s take step back in time to understand this device’s origins. I’m sure you may already be aware of many of the devices listed, but for those who may be new to some of them, I’ll list them below.
Handheld gaming began with Nintendo going as far back as early 80s with the Nintendo Game & Watch series of handheld gaming devices. These were single game devices that played very simplistic games, such as Fire and Ball. These simplistic games had you doing very simplistic things, such as with Fire, catching people as they tumble out of a burning building or in Ball, juggling balls.
Nintendo realized the magic of these small single-game handhelds and introduced the more flexible cartridge based GameBoy. Using cartridges, this handheld gaming unit offered the ability to switch games out and play many different games, up to as many as cartridges were made. It also offered game play on the go in a compact format.
Since then, we’ve seen a number of portable gaming handhelds in the subsequent years including:
- Gameboy Color
- Gameboy Color Clamshell
- Atari Lynx
- Sega Gamegear
- Nintendo DS
- Nintendo 3DS
- Neo Geo Pocket
- Sony PSP
- Nokia NGage
- Sony Xperia Play
- Sony PS Vita
- NVIDIA Shield
- Nintendo Switch
and now we have the Steam Deck to add to this list. I didn’t include the Nintendo Wii U because while it had a portable element in the Gamepad, it simply wasn’t possible to play games strictly on the Gamepad on-the-go.
The Reviews
The early reviewers of the Steam Deck call it groundbreaking. Yet, the Steam Deck doesn’t solve any of the fundamental problems of handheld consoles of this variety. So, how exactly is it groundbreaking? It isn’t. It has one huge limitation that makes it fall far short of “ground breaking”. It’s also buggy as all get-out in far too many places that matter. Let’s take a closer look at the Steam Deck. 
From the above image, it looks like a fairly standard kind of handheld with …
- A large touch screen
- Two thumbsticks
- A D-Pad
- ABXY buttons (using the Xbox Controller layout)
- A ‘Steam’ button
- A ‘…’ menu button
- Two shoulder and two trigger buttons
- (new) Two trackpad buttons below the thumb sticks
- (new) Two additional buttons (View and Options) between the thumbsticks and the D-Pad and ABXY buttons.
- Power, volume up (+) and down (-), headphone jack, USB-C port and reset buttons are on the top edge.
This console runs Linux, or rather SteamOS, apparently. I’m uncertain why Steam chose to go with Linux on this handheld when choosing Windows would have been a much more compatible option. I mean, every single PC game would operate right out of the box on a handheld built on Windows. My only thought is that Gabe Newell didn’t want to fork over a bunch of cash to Microsoft to make this console a reality. Using a Linux based SteamOS meant cheaper outlay and no royalty fees.
Unfortunately, that design choice immediately sacrifices game compatibility right out of the gate. No where is this more apparent than when you attempt to play some games, which simply crash outright. Seeing as this is Linux based, it must use a Windows compatibility stack. The SteamOS apparently uses the open source Proton for its Windows compatibility stack, in similar form to Wine (Wine Is Not an Emulator). In fact, Proton’s Windows compatibility is based on Wine, but is being developed and improved by Valve and CodeWeavers. If you’ve ever used Wine, then you know it’s not ready for everyday use the vast majority of the time. Valve’s Proton layer may be better, but it can’t be that much better than Wine.
One thing I’ll say about compatibility is that it can work great one minute and suck hard the next. It’s entirely dependent on so many tiny little things to line up. Instead of fighting with compatibility layers, the Steam Deck could have run Windows directly and avoided all of these compatibility problems. Assuming the the point is to play Windows games, then why fake Windows when you can use the real thing? If the Steam Deck had at least been given the option of loading Windows as its operating system, then a buggy Windows compatibility layer wouldn’t have been required.
Pricing
The Steam Deck isn’t cheap. Let’s examine the Steam Deck’s pricing levels:
For $399, that gets you an entry level handheld device and a carrying case. I’m assuming the Steam Deck also ships with a power cord and power brick, but it’s not listed in the above. If you want the top end version of the Steam Deck, you’re going to fork over $650 … more once you’ve bought accessories and games and paid taxes.
Let’s put this into perspective. For $499 ($100 more than the Steam Deck’s base model), you can buy a PS5 or an Xbox Series X. Both are true gaming consoles, but not handhelds.
PlayStation Vita, NVIDIA Shield, Nintendo Switch
All three of these consoles are the most recent iteration of touch screen “tablet” handhelds. These are the handhelds that should have been able to perform the best. In fact, the NVIDIA Shield should have been competitive with this console. Although, the Shield is now several years old at this point.
However, the Shield tried exactly what the Steam Deck is now trying. To bring PC gaming to a handheld. Yet, for whatever reason, it hasn’t ultimately worked.
That’s not to say that the Steam Deck won’t have some success, but ultimately it likely won’t succeed in the way Gabe hopes. It’s not for lack of trying. This format has been tried multiple times each with varying degrees of success, but none so runaway as to call it massively successful. As I said above, though, there’s one huge fail in the Steam Deck’s design. I’ll come to this shortly.
Of all of them, Nintendo’s Switch is probably the closest to a ‘runaway success’, but it’s still not winning the handheld space. What is? The Smartphone. Why? Because of it’s multifunction purpose. You can play games as easily as answer the phone as easily as book your next flight to Aruba. A phone supports always on data and, thus, gaming can take full advantage of that fact… making carrying around a phone the easiest gaming handheld available. On top of this, smartphones are updated about every year, making them 100% compatible with your current software, but allowing them to run that software much more fluidly. Gaming handhelds, like the Steam Deck, are lucky to be updated once every 3 years.
The point is, the handheld market is dominated by smartphones, not gaming handhelds. The reason for this, as I stated above, is clear. Not to mention, the battery life on phones, while not perfect, is about as good as you can expect in that sized device. It lasts all day, at least 8 hours. Many phone batteries can last up to 12 hours.
Handheld Gaming Battery Woes
Handheld gaming devices, at best, offer about 2 hours of play time with the best games. That’s a problem with the Nintendo Switch, the PS Vita, the NVIDIA Shield and, yes, even the Steam Deck. The point is, 2 hours of play time is simply not enough when you’re attempting to become immersed in a brand new game. All immersion is immediately broken when you see that sad red flashing battery icon letting you know your battery is about to die.
Sure, you can then find a wall outlet to plug into to continue your gaming, but that can be a hassle. This is also the fundamental problem why such handheld gaming consoles don’t sell as well as they should. You can’t produce fabulous looking games at a rock stable 60 FPS gaming experience when you’re limited to 2 hours of play time. The OS must then play internal conservation tricks with frame rates, CPU power levels, GPU power levels, shutting hard drives down and so on. These power saving techniques mean better battery life, but poor gaming performance. It also gets worse as the battery runs down. Less amperage and voltage means limiting CPU and GPU computing speeds.
This problem exists even with the Nintendo Switch, but Nintendo has taken a balanced approach by reducing the resolution to 720p when playing on the console’s screen. Moving the Switch to OLED, though, likely means even better battery life. An LCD screen backlight is a huge power drain. When using OLED, each LED in the screen uses much less overall power than a full sized backlight. Unfortunately, OLED also raises the cost of the unit simply due to its inclusion. Basically, to get a small amount of battery savings from an OLED display means the consumer shelling out $50 more ($349) to replace a Switch that you may already paid $300 previously.
Display Technology
Unfortunately, Valve chose not to use OLED to help save battery power for the Steam Deck. Instead, Valve chose to build it with a TFT LCD screen with a backlight. Let’s talk about the screen for a moment. What type of screen does the Steam Deck offer?
- 7-inch touchscreen
- 1280 x 800 (16:10)
- 60 Hz
- IPS (In-Plane Switching)
- Anti-glare etched glass
This is a decent screen type for handheld. Consider, though, that the Nintendo Switch offers OLED at 1280×720 (720p) at $349, meaning that the screen on the Steam Deck is only 80 pixels wider. However, even were the Steam Deck to ship with an OLED screen, the CPU and GPU are the power hungry hogs in this unit. Yes, the Backlight does consume power, but not at the same rate as the CPU and GPU. An OLED screen might buy the unit an additional 15-45 minutes of play time depending on many factors for how the screen is used. Meaning, the fewer pixels lit, the less power it takes to drive the screen.
On a handheld, OLED should always be the first consideration when choosing a display, if only because of the backlight power savings. For a TV monitor, OLED’s benefits are inky blackness in dark areas.
I give it to Valve, though. You gotta start your design somewhere and LCD was the easiest place to start the Steam Deck, I suppose. Let’s hope that the next iteration, assuming there is one, that Gabe considers the power savings an OLED screen affords in a handheld design.
Can the Steam Deck succeed?
Unknown, but probably not this version. Did I mention that one huge flaw in this design? It’s still coming. Though, based on its current specifications, I’d give it a relatively low chance for success. Why? Because a gaming-only piece of hardware swimming in among a sea of smartphones doesn’t exactly indicate success. Oh, the unit will sell to various die-hard gamers and those who really want to be out-and-about gaming (ahem). But, those die-hard gamers are not going prop up this market. If that were to happen, the PS Vita would have succeeded. Yet, it hasn’t.
The only reason the Nintendo Switch has done as well as it has isn’t because of the Switch itself. It’s because of the franchises that Nintendo owns: Super Mario, Donkey Kong, Pokémon, Animal Crossing, Super Smash, Zelda, Mario Party, Kirby, Metroid and so on. These franchises drive the sales of the device, not the other way around. Nintendo could put out the worst piece of handheld garbage imaginable and people would still flock to it so long as they can play Pokémon.
Unfortunately, the Steam Deck doesn’t have legitimate access to these Nintendo franchises (other than through emulation after-the-fact). The Steam Deck must rely on games written for SteamOS or that are compatible with SteamOS. Even then, not all of these Steam games work on the Steam Deck properly, because they were designed to work with a mouse and keyboard, not a console controller. In essence, putting these games on a Steam Deck is tantamount to shoving a square peg into a round hole. Sometimes you can get it to work. Sometimes you can’t.
Ultimately, what this all means for the Steam Deck is a mixed bag and a mixed gaming experience.
Games Should Just Work
Consoles have taught us that games should simply “just work”. What that means to the gamer is that the simple act of opening a game on a console means that it launches and plays without problems. Though, recently, many games devs have taken this to a whole new and bad level… I’m looking at you, Bethesda.
With the Nintendo Switch, for example, games simply just work. The Nintendo Switch is, if nothing else, one of the best handheld gaming experiences I’ve had with a handheld. Not from a battery perspective, but from a “just works” perspective. I can’t even recall the last time I ran a Nintendo game that crashed outright back to the dashboard. Nintendo’s games are always rock solid.
Unfortunately, for the Steam Deck, that experience doesn’t exist. Some games may work well. Some may work halfway. Some may crash part way through. Some games won’t launch. The experience is a mixed bag. This poor level of experience is exactly why the Steam Deck may or may not succeed. That and the Steam Deck’s one big flaw… yes, that info is still coming.
When paying $400-700 for a gaming console, you expect games to play. Yet, even though the game is listed on the Steam store doesn’t imply the Steam Deck will run it. That’s a fairly major problem with the Steam Deck.
Instead, the Steam Deck folks need to create a tried and tested list of Steam Deck games and limit only those games to being visible, available and playable on the Steam Deck’s interface. Basically, the unit should prevent you from seeing, downloading and attempting to play any game which has not been thoroughly tested as functional on the Steam Deck. This vetting is important to bring the Steam Deck back into a similar stable play experience to other handhelds, like Nintendo. If a game doesn’t work, you can’t see it or download it on the Steam Deck.
This “games just work” mentality is an important aspect to a gaming handheld like the Steam Deck. It’s a make or break aspect of marketing this handheld. It’s not that difficult to limit which games can be seen and downloaded. There’s absolutely no reason why this handheld shows games that knowingly don’t work or that are knowingly unstable. Yes, such limits will reduce the amount of games available, but will improve the overall play experience of this device for buyers.
When spending $400, we’ve come to expect a specific level of sanity and stability. This goes hand-in-hand for the price tag, even for the Steam Deck.
Yet, reviewers have stated that their review models have experienced a completely mixed bag. Some games that work, work well. Some games that were expected to work, haven’t worked at all. Some games that worked well have crashed the following day of play. This problem all comes back down to the Proton compatibility problems mentioned earlier.
Success or Failure?
At this point, it’s too early to tell, but one big flaw will likely prevent full success. However, let me dive right into my own opinion of this handheld console. My first observation is that the Steam Deck is physically too big. I understand that Steam wanted it to have a big enough screen with the Steam Deck, but its simply too big and bulky. With the added bulk of the controls, it simply becomes oversized.
Instead, how I would handled design of this platform would have been to use a separate remote joystick. Design the screen to be a simple tablet display with a hefty fan, kickstand and no controls on the tablet at all (other than volume, power, reset and headphone jack). Then, have a separate joystick that can be charged and carried separately. This does a couple of things. Joysticks with separate batteries mean no drain on the console battery under use. Additionally, a battery in the joystick could be hefty enough to be used as a supplemental power source, which can be tapped by the console to extend its battery life once the console is out and about. Having a separate battery means longer play time, thus carrying a separate and charged joystick means extra playtime.
Separate joysticks also feel better in the hand than attached joysticks on handhelds like this. The wide spaced joystick always feels somewhat awkward to use. This awkwardness can be overcome after using it for some time, but I’ve never really gotten past the awkwardness of the Nintendo Switch. I always prefer using the Pro controller over the attached JoyCons. The mechanics used to drive the sticks in a small form factor like the Steam Deck are squashed down and usually don’t feel correct. Using a full sized joystick, these awkward sizing and design issues don’t exist.
With the PS Vita, this spacing problem was less of a problem due to the smaller screen. Though, playing games with the smashed-flat thumbsticks on the PS Vita always felt awkward.
I do get having an attached controller, though. For places like on a train or a bus or in a car, it may be difficult to use two separate devices. Thus, having a controller built-in solves that problem in these few situations. Yet, I don’t know if I’d hamper a handheld device’s size simply to cover a few limited places where having a separate controller won’t easily work. The vast majority of out-and-about play locations would allow for using a controller separately from the LCD screen base, which can be propped up or even hung.
However, these are all relatively minor problems not likely cause failure of sales of the device. The major problem with this device is its lack of additional functionality. For example, it’s not a phone. You can’t make calls using the device.
SteamOS also seems to also offer limited productivity apps, such as word processors, video editors and so on. It does have a browser, but even that seems limited because of the limited controls. You’d have to pair a keyboard if you want more functionality.
Because SteamOS is based on Linux, there’s limited commercial software available for Linux. Unlike MacOS X and Windows, where the vast majority of software is being written, Linux doesn’t have many of these commercial software options. To run Windows apps requires a compatibility stack like Proton, to which those problems have been discussed above.
The Steam Deck goes way deeper than not being a phone, though. It has no cell phone data capability at all. I’ve been teasing the Steam Deck’s biggest flaw… so here it is. No on-the-go always on networking. Meaning, there’s no way to play multiplayer games while out and about without carrying additional devices. Which leads to….
Multiplayer Games?
Don’t go into the purchase of a Steam Deck for any purpose other than single player offline gaming. Know that you won’t be making cell phone calls nor have any easy always-on data options available. If you want data while out and about, you’re going to need a WiFi network handy, to carry a MiFi hotspot with you or use your phone as a WiFi hotspot. This means you’ll need to carry a second device for playing any games which require multiplayer. Because too many games these days require multiplayer always-on Internet, the Steam Deck substantially misses the boat here.
Even still, using a phone or MiFi hotspot may limit your speeds enough to prevent the use of multiplayer in some games. If you try to use a Starbucks or Target store WiFi, you may find that gaming is blocked entirely. This is a huge downside to this device for out-and-about multiplayer gaming. Basically, the only games you can play while out and about are single player offline games only, not multiplayer. While some offline games are still being made, many games now require online Internet at all times, regardless of whether you are playing multiplayer. As more and more game devs require always online status, this will limit the usefulness of this model of the Steam Deck over time.
Instead, Valve needs to rethink this design of the Steam Deck. Valve should include a cell phone radio so that this unit can join a 5G network to enable always-on networking. This is a huge miss for the Steam Deck… one that shouldn’t have been missed. Multiplayer gaming is here to stay and pretty much so is always online Internet. As I said, many game devs require always online Internet.
The lack of a cell phone data network on the Steam Deck limits out and about play for far too many games. Ultimately, the novelty of the Steam Deck’s handheld’s remote play basically limits you to playing multiplayer games in and around your home or at places where you know high speed online gaming is allowed, which isn’t very many places. Even Hotels may limit speeds such that some online games won’t function properly. Thus, the lack of always-on Internet actually undermines the portability of the Steam Deck, making it far less portable for gaming than one might expect.
Instead, Valve needs to team up with a large mobile carrier to offer always-on data networking for the Steam Deck that also allows for full speed gaming. Thus, this would mean including a built-in cell phone radio that offers purchasing a data plan offering high-speed 5G always-on network multiplayer gaming. Once this is achieved, only then could this device be considered ‘ground breaking’. Without this always-on networking capability, the Steam Deck handheld is firmly tied to a past where fewer and fewer offline games are being created today.
Success or Failure Part II
Circling back around… the Steam Deck, while novel and while also offering access to the Steam library of games may not yet be all that it can be. This handheld needs a lot more design consideration to become truly useful in today’s gaming circles.
Some gamers may be willing to shell out $399 to play it, but many won’t. The limitations of this unit far outweigh it’s usefulness as a modern handheld console. Back when the PS Vita offered two versions, WiFi only version and a Cell Phone version, that was at a time when multiplayer gaming was still not always online.
Today, because many games require always-on Internet, not having a cell phone network available on this gaming “tablet” (yes, it is a tablet), is highly limiting for multiplayer gaming. Multiplayer gaming isn’t going away. If anything, it’s getting bigger each year. Choosing not to include or offer a cell phone data version of this tablet is a huge miss.
My guess for success of this specific version of the Steam Deck is that its success will be limited. It will sell some, but only to very specific gamers. I seriously doubt that it will be considered “ground breaking” in any substantial way, particularly after missing the general purpose nature of a tablet combined with including an always-on a cell data network feature.
I felt this way both with the Nintendo Switch and with the NVIDIA Shield. Both of those tablets have done okay with their respective markets, particularly Nintendo’s Switch. It’s done exceedingly well, but only because of Nintendo’s major game franchises and because none of those franchises (other than Mario Kart) require heavy networking. The Shield, like this tablet, has only done okay in sales. Not great, not horrible.
If Valve wants to sell this gaming tablet as it is, it needs to strike while the iron is hot and while this tablet is new. Advertise the crap out of it everywhere. Because it’s new, people will be interested to have a look. Many more will buy it because it’s new. Eventually, all of the above limitations will be apparent, but only after people have paid their cash and already purchased it.
Personally, this unit has too many limitations for me to consider it. If this gaming tablet offered both cell phone data options AND full Windows gaming compatibility, I might have considered it. It isn’t enough to offer many from the Steam library of games. It also needs to offer the fundamental basics for multiplayer gaming.
For example, you wouldn’t be able to play Fallout 76 while out and about without access to a high speed MiFi hotspot. Thus, you also won’t be able to play multiplayer games like Fortnite, Overwatch or Destiny using a Steam Deck while riding a train to work. The lack of a multiplayer always-on data network is huge miss that ultimately undermines the usability of the Steam Deck and is also its biggest design flaw; a flaw that shouldn’t have been missed by the Valve team at the Steam Deck’s price tag.
Overall, I can’t personally recommend the purchase of the Steam Deck as a portable modern gaming device strictly because of its lack of thoughtful design around multiplayer gaming while on the go. However, the Steam Deck is probably fine if used as a home console device using a wireless controller while hooked to a widescreen TV and connected to a home high speed WiFi network. It may also be worth it if you intend to use it primarily to play offline single player games or if you intend to use it as a retro emulator for 80s and 90s games. Still, it’s way overpowered for the likes of Joust, Dig Dug or Defender.
↩︎
ffmpeg: A recipe for HD video on portables
The first thing people are likely to ask about this article is how to rip a blu-ray disk. Unfortunately, I’ll have to leave that task for you to figure out. There are plenty of places on the net to find this information. I’d suggest you visit www.doom9.org and poke around there to find your answer. Once you have your HD video ripped, that’s where this article will help you produce a high quality portable video experience for your tablet or phone.
What is ffmpeg?
I’ll start with an analogy. What sox is to audio, ffmpeg is to video (and audio). Sox is a great tool if you need to manage wave files, mp3s or au files. But, these audio formats are not so great when you want to use it as a soundtrack in a video. That’s where ffmpeg shines.
Ffmpeg is a tool that converts one video + audio format into another. For example, a blu-ray disk contains a file format known as m2ts. This is a type of container that holds various types of video, audio, chapter and subtitle information (many times, several of these). However, the m2ts file, while playable with VLC, is not so playable on an iPad, iPod or a Samsung Galaxy Tab. In fact, portables won’t play the formats contained in an m2ts container. Of course, it’s not that you’d want to play this format on your tablet because an m2ts file can be 25G-40G in size. Considering an iPad has, at most, 128GB, you’d only be able to store about 3 of these honking videos.. not that you’d actually be able to play them as the format is incompatible. To the rescue, ffmpeg.
ffmpeg and video containers
The format of choice that Apple prefers is H264 + AAC. The first thing I will say about this is that the libraries needed to get ffmpeg to produce this format are not in the pre-compiled version. Instead, you’ll need to set aside a weekend to compile up the latest version of ffmpeg with the non-free libraries. By ‘non-free’, that means these libraries are potentially encumbered by copyrighted or patented code. For this reason, the pre-compiled versions do not contain such code. Therefore, it’s impossible to produce an H264 + AAC mp4 video file with the pre-compiled versions. This means you have to compile it yourself.
Explaining how to compile ffmpeg is a bit beyond the scope of this article. If you are interested in this topic, please leave a comment below and let me know that you’re interested in such an article. I will state, of compiling this, that the –enable-free option when running configure on ffmpeg is only half the battle. You first need to go get the non-free libraries and compile them up separately. Then, when compiling ffmpeg, reference the already compiled non-free AAC shared libraries so that ffmpeg can link with them. ‘Nuf said about compiling it.
The good thing about ffmpeg is that this tool understands nearly every video container type out there. This includes VOB (DVD format) and m2ts (blu-ray format). For what it’s worth, it also understands HD-DVD format even though this format is long dead.
Converting with ffmpeg
There are what seem like a ton of options when you type in ‘ffmpeg –help’. In fact, the help is so daunting as to turn off many beginners who might look for something else. Yes, there are tons of options that can tweak the resulting video file output. That’s why this article is here. I have found what I believe to be the perfect video conversion method from 30GB m2ts format to around 3GB files that fit quite comfortably on an iPad or Galaxy TabS and still retain HD quality. Without further adieu, let’s get to the recipe:
Pass 1
/usr/local/bin/ffmpeg -y -i “/path/to/input.m2ts” -f mp4 -metadata title=”movie_title” -vcodec libx264 -level 31 -s 1920×1080 -vf crop=1920:800:0:140 -b:v 3600k -bt 1024k -bufsize 10M -maxrate 10M -g 250 -coder 0 -partitions 0 -me_method dia -subq 1 -trellis 0 -refs 1 -flags +loop -cmp +chroma -me_range 16 -keyint_min 25 -sc_threshold 40 -i_qfactor 0.71 -qcomp 0.6 -qmin $qmin -qmax $qmax -qdiff 4 number_of_cpu_cores -pass 1 -acodec libfdk_aac -cutoff 20000 -ab 192k -ac 2 “/path/to/output.mp4”
Pass 2
/usr/local/bin/ffmpeg -y -i “/path/to/input.m2ts” -f mp4 -metadata title=”movie_title” -vcodec libx264 -level 31 -s 1920×1080 -vf crop=1920:800:0:140 -b:v 3600k -bt 1024k -bufsize 10M -maxrate 10M -g 250 -coder 0 -partitions 0 -me_method dia -subq 1 -trellis 0 -refs 1 -flags +loop -cmp +chroma -me_range 16 -keyint_min 25 -sc_threshold 40 -i_qfactor 0.71 -qcomp 0.6 -qmin $qmin -qmax $qmax -qdiff 4 number_of_cpu_cores -pass 2 -acodec libfdk_aac -cutoff 20000 -ab 192k -ac 2 10 “/path/to/output.mp4”
Note that the libfdk_aac is a non-free library which will not be in the free and pre-compiled version.
Two Passes? Doesn’t that take longer?
Yes, it does. Two passes are necessary to provide the best motion quality in the video. The first pass retrieves statistics about each frame transition of the film and stores it in a statistics file. The second pass reads this very large first-pass-created (~2 GB) statistic file and uses it to creates smooth transitions between each frame of the output video. For this reason, you need to make sure to have plenty of disk space free. This two-pass system removes the herky-jerky video experience (especially with horizontal camera pans). Ultimately, what you’ll find is that the recipe above gives the absolute best quality and size I’ve yet to find from any conversion. For a 90-120 minute film, you’re looking at around a 2.5G-4G resulting mp4 for full 1080p + stereo audio. This file is compatible with the iPad and the Samsung Galaxy series.
Conversion of 90-120 minute films can take anywhere between 40 to 70 minutes for each movie conversion. You can run them in parallel on your system, but you’ll need to run them in separate directories to keep the statistics files in the first pass separate.
Stereo audio? Why Stereo?
I always convert down to stereo for good reason. These videos are intended to be used on portable devices. I’ve yet to see any tablet, computer or phone support 5.1 or 7.1 audio with the built-in audio hardware. Leaving the multi-channel audio intact is basically pointless and consumes extra disk space. Sure, if you want to export the video and audio to something like the Apple TV, it might be handy to have. But then, you’d probably want to stream the m2ts file rather than a slightly more sucky mp4. After all, converting to mp4 is equivalent to ripping a CD audio to mp3. It makes the size of the file much smaller, but is also lossy. However, in this case, sucky isn’t sucky at all and most portable devices support stereo.
In other words, the output is stereo because portable devices don’t support multichannel audio. At least, not yet.
How good is the video quality?
Excellent. It’s will not be exactly the same quality as the m2ts file (that’s not possible considering it is being compressed), but when viewing on a portable, it’s practically like watching a blu-ray disk. The video is still 1080p. It’s that good, all in about 3GB size. Note the crop size above. It is designed to remove the black bars from the top and bottom. When blu-rays are encoded, they are encoded full 16:9 even when the video may be wide screen. This means that the black bars are stored as extra video information in the video file. Removing this unnecessary black space eliminates encoding this blank video, thus reducing the size of the output file. Because these black bars are totally unnecessary, it also makes for a better viewing experience when watching the video in a picture-in-picture style window.
However, the crop value given is intended to be used with widescreen 2.35:1 and 2.39:1 films that have been produced since the mid-1970s. Widescreen films produced in the 1960s and before have a different aspect ratio and using this crop value will cut off pieces of the top and bottom. There are also some films that use unique and creative aspect ratios that may not work with that crop value. Also, many animated films are full 16:9, so you’ll want to remove the -vf crop=1920:800:0:140 argument entirely to prevent ffmpeg from cropping.
Calculate Crop
To calculate crop, here’s how to do it. The arguments are crop=:::. Here’s the table:
- hwidth = horizontal width of input video
- vheight = vertical height of video
- hoffset = how much to move the video horizontally (into frame)
- voffset = how much to move the video vertically (into frame)
Note that my crop recipe above does no horizontal cropping, but it can be done just as vertical cropping. For the vertical cropping, note that I’ve reduced the frame canvas size from 1080 to 800 to make the frame the proper aspect ratio. But, reducing the frame size from 1080 to 800 only changes the size of the video canvas. It doesn’t move the content back into frame, yet. To do that, you need hoffset and voffset. To calculate the voffset value and move the video into the newly sized canvas, you need to fill in the voffset value. To do that, subtract 800 from 1080. So, 1080 – 800 = 280. Then, divide that subtracted value by 2. So, 280 / 2 = 140. The voffset value is 140. About cropping, one thing is important to note. If you divide the value and get floating point number like 141.2222. You can’t use this. You need to adjust the voffset value so that it is always a whole number. To do this, ensure when you subtract your vertical size from 1080, it always results in an even number so that the division by 2 also results in a whole number.
VBV underflow warnings?
Note that when converting some content, the conversion output may occasionally show VBV underflow. This is intentional. While it is possible to get rid of these warnings by raising or removing the -bufsize and -maxrate options, raising this value may also increase the size of the output movie file. This underflow warning means that there’s just too much input to be stored in the requested output bitrate. That’s why I say this video won’t be exactly identical to the input file. This selected settings given provide the perfect marriage between size, quality and functionality. If you raise or eliminate the -maxrate option to get rid of the warnings, so too will the size increase of the output video file. Because I prefer the mp4 file sizes to remain in the 2.5-4GB size range and because the VBV underflow warnings do not materially impact the resulting output file, I have chosen not fix this issue. However, if you would like to get rid of these warnings, you can remove the arguments -bufsize 10M -maxrate 10M or increase these values as you see fit. However, you might want to read this wiki article describing the interrelationships between -b:v, -bufsize and -maxrate.
Because I also want the final videos to have the most steady bitrate possible (very important for any kind of streaming), I allow the VBV underflow warnings. Removing the -maxrate and -bufsize options (to get rid of the warnings) will allow the bitrate to vary wildly at times. This can cause unsteady or choppy playback in some players, especially when network streaming. To avoid wild variability in the bitrate, I intentionally force -bufsize and -maxrate to be a specific size.
Enjoy the recipe. Hopefully, it’s helpful. If you get good results from these ffmpeg recipes, please leave a comment below. Also, feel free to tweak the recipes with however you see fit. If you find something even better than what I show above, please post a comment below and let me know what you did. I’m always interested in seeing what people can do with ffmpeg.
iPad, iPod, iPhone, iConsume
While all of these new Apple devices seem really great on the surface (pun intended), with no effective local storage, the design behind these devices offers no thought on creation or export of created content. However, the design clearly targets consumption of digital goods. Effectively, this is a one-way device for content. That is, content goes in but it doesn’t come back out. The question begs, however, does Apple think that we are only consumers now? We are now relegated to being just a bunch of ravenous money spending consumers? We don’t have brains in our heads or creativity or imagination? We’re just a bunch of finger pushing consumers with portable devices?
Consumerism
If there’s anything that Apple has done in recent years with these one-way devices, it’s to solidify consumerism. That is, to sell us products that are essentially one-way content input devices. Granted, it has a camera so we can take pictures or video. And yes, they may have even managed to get a video editor onto an iPad, but these apps aren’t designed for professional level editing (or even prosumer level editing). Sure, it’s fine for some random party or perhaps even a low quality wedding souvenir, but these consumer-centric devices really don’t offer much for creativity or imagination, let alone software development. It doesn’t even much offer a way to produce a spreadsheet or a word processor document. No, these platforms are almost entirely designed for consumption of digital goods (i.e., books, movies, magazines, music, web content, games, etc).
Lack of Creativity
These devices were designed to consume, not create. Consume, consume, consume and then consume some more. Yes, some creativity apps have popped up, but they’re more game than serious. They’re there to let you play when you’re bored. Even these creativity apps must be consumed before you can use them. As these are really read-only devices (no hard drive, external storage or other ways of getting things out of the device), these creativity apps really aren’t meant to be taken seriously. In other words, these apps are there to placate those who might think these are consumer focused only. In reality, these creative apps are shells of what a real creative app looks like, such as Photoshop, Illustrator, AutoCAD or Maya. Even prosumer apps like Poser and Daz Studio are still leaps and bounds better than anything that’s available on these iConsumer devices.
Computers vs iConsumers
Computers are designed as well rounded devices capable of not only consuming content, but creating it. That is, as a computer owner, you have the choice to both produce and consume content. Granted, there are a lot of people who have no intention of writing music, painting a digital work, developing an application or writing a novel. However, with a computer, you have these choices available. With iConsumer devices, you really don’t. On IOS 4 or even Android, these devices just don’t have enough resources to run these types of full sized apps. So, you won’t find a full Office suite on the Droid or an iPhone. Even something as big as the iPad still doesn’t have a productivity suite that would work in a proper or efficient way. Granted, Android likely supports Google Docs. But, even still, I don’t want to sit around all day pecking in information on a chicklet keyboard of a phone. Give me a solid full sized qwerty keyboard any day for creation.
Cloud Computing, Operating Systems and a step backwards
Apple definitely missed the ball on this one. With a device like the iPad without any local storage, the only way this device could actually create is by using cloud computing services. Unfortunately, Apple offers nothing in cloud computing. The iTunes store is a poor alternative to that. In fact, the iTunes store is just a store. It doesn’t offer online apps like Google Docs, it doesn’t offer any types of web based or cloud based services that the iPad can consume. The sole way to deal with the iPad is through apps that you must download from the store. Yes, there may be ‘an app for that’, but many times there isn’t.
The other difficulties with apps is that they don’t work together on the device. There is no app synergy. For example, NeXTStep (the operating system that gave birth to Mac OS X and later iOS4) was a brilliant design. It offered a system where any app could extend the operating system by adding new controls or features. New apps installed could then consume those controls within its own app framework (sometimes even launching the other app to do so). With iPhone OS (any version), Jobs has taken a huge step backwards in computing. No longer is this extension system available. Apps are just standalone things that don’t interact or interrelate to or with one another. Yes, now multitasking may be back, but they’re still just standalone things. About the extent of interrelation between apps is having one app launch Safari and open a URL. Wow.. so sophisticated.
Notebook and creation tools
Granted, there are a lot of people who’s sole goal is to consume. And yes, it’s probably true that most people only want to consume. The question is, though, do you want to give up the ability to create to only consume? That’s exactly what you give up when you buy into the iPad, iPod or iPhone. When these portable devices can clearly consume and create content equally well and don’t force consumers to make this choice when purchasing a device, then the device will have its true potential. Until then, I see these consumerist devices as easy ways to give your money away. For people who don’t need portable creation tools, that’s fine. For those of us who do, then a full fledge hard drive-equipped notebook is still the only portable device that fills this void.
Cloud Computing Standards
We are not where we need to be. Again, the iPad was a shortsighted rapidly-designed device. It was designed for a small singular purpose, but that purpose wasn’t long term designed. Sure, the OS is upgradeable and perhaps the device may get to that point. Perhaps not. Apple has a bad habit of releasing new devices making the old ones obsolete within months of the previously-new device. So, even if a device is truly capable of reaching its potential, Apple will have tossed it aside for a new hardware device 6-10 months later.
Clearly, cloud computing will need to establish a standard by which all cloud computing devices will operate. That means, the standards will discuss exactly how icons are managed, how apps are installed and how people will interface with the cloud apps. That doesn’t mean that different devices with different input devices can’t be created. The devices can, in fact, all be different. One computer may be keyboard and mouse based, another may be touch surface based. What the cloud standards will accomplish is a standard by which users will interact with the cloud. So, no matter what computer you are using, you will always consume the cloud apps the same way. That also means the cloud apps will always work the same no matter what interface you are using.
We are kind of there now, but the web is fractured. We currently have no idea how to find new sites easily. Searching for new sites is a nightmare. Cloud computing standards would need to reduce the nightmare of search, increase ease of use for consumers and provide standardized ways of dealing with cloud computing services. In other words, the web needs dramatic simplification.
Cloud Computing and the iPad
The iPad is the right device at the wrong time and consumers will eventually see this once a real cloud computing device hits the market. Then, the iPad will be seen as a crude toy by comparison. A true cloud computing device will offer no storage, but have a huge infrastructure of extensible interrelated apps available online. Apps similar to Google Docs, but so many more types all throughout every single app category. From games, to music, to video, to photography, to finance, to everything you can imagine. Yes, a true cloud computing device will be able to consume as freely as it can create. A cloud computing OS will install apps as links to cloud services. That is, an icon will show on the ‘desktop’, but simply launch connectivity right into the cloud.
Nothing says that you need a mouse and keyboard to create content, but you do need professional quality to produce professional content. I liken the apps on the iPad to plastic play money you buy for your kids. Effectively, they’re throw-away toy apps. They’re not there for serious computing. To fully replace the desktop with cloud computing, it will need fully secured full-featured robust content creation and consumption applications. You won’t download apps at all. In fact, you will simply turn your portable computer on and the cloud will do the rest. Of course, you might have to use a login and password and you might be required to pay a monthly fee. But, since people are already paying the $30 a month for 3G service, we’re already getting accustomed to the notion of a monthly service fee. It’s only a matter of time before we are doing all of our computing on someone else’s equipment using a portable device. For listening to music, we’ll need streaming. But, with a solid state cache drive, the device will automatically download the music and listen offline. In fact, that will be necessary. But this is all stuff that must be designed and thought out properly long before any cloud device is released. …something which Apple did not do for the iPad. What they did do, though, is create the perfect digital consumption device. That is, they produced a device that lets them nickel and dime you until your wallet hates you.
iPad: After the dust settles
We are now a month post iPad launch and where are we? Some news sites are postulating the the use of iPad in the enterprise world. I can’t even fathom a use for it at home, much less putting it into the hands of corporate users. Let’s examine this platform more carefully to understand the reasons for its lack of viability in Enterprise, much less for simple home uses.
Multitasking
I know a lot of media outlets have harped endlessly on the lack of multitasking. Granted, it is a computing device and most computing devices do require some level of multitasking. I know that the iPod and the iPhone had very little internal memory (at least up to 3rd gen editions). So, it could only comfortably run one app. That was primarily a memory limitation. With the latest iPhone and iPod touch, that may have all changed. To be perfectly honest, I don’t keep up with Apple’s hardware spec details. Why? Because it’s not really that much of an interest. I mean, that’s the point. It shouldn’t be. Apple has always touted their devices ‘just work’. So, why should I need to dig inside one of their devices to find out the gritty details? I shouldn’t need to.
This issue is also what bites Apple many times over. They decide to under design the device by putting in not enough resources. So, they have to make concessions in the operating system by removing things like multitasking. Of course, with the iPod touch and the iPhone, we’re talking about very small devices that may not have the physical room to hold the amount of resources necessary to support multitasking.
The iPad’s physical size should no longer hinder their ability to put in the necessary resources to fully support multitasking (and then some). So, there is no reason why the iPad shouldn’t have supported multitasking out of the gate. But, it doesn’t. The iPhone 4.0 OS is supposed to address this issue, but not until the fall of 2010.
Multitasking and how it relates to computing
So, is it required that a PC support multitasking? Good question. It’s also a question not easily answered. In general, though, the answer should be ‘yes’. It should be ‘yes’ because the ability to run multiple apps is necessary to get things done. For example, to copy and paste between two different documents or to share information through application conduits. Even the simple act of embedding one app inside another requires multitasking. Quitting and restarting each app to move between them is cumbersome and time wasting.
In the end, yes, multitasking is required to make the computing experience be what we’ve come to expect. In the iPad, that computing experience isn’t there. So, for this reason, iPad won’t be fully accepted without multitasking. We’ll revisit this topic, however, once multitasking is (re) introduced in iPhone 4.0 OS.
Enterprise computing and the iPad
Is it ready for enterprise? I personally would say no. I’ve owned an iPod touch for several years and since the iPad really has no better selection in enterprise apps than does the iPod touch, the answer to this question is still no. Even though the screen on iPad is larger, it doesn’t offer the necessary productivity apps to fully work in a corporate enterprise. Yes, it does have a mail app. That’s a big part of what makes it work in Enterprise. Unfortunately, that mail app is so locked down and limited, that it may not fully work for the enterprise. That’s not to say that the mail app isn’t good in a pinch or to read a quick current email or two. But, don’t try to go searching for emails buried in your folders, that just doesn’t work well.
For enterprise computing, the current incarnation of the iPad is nowhere near ready.
What uses does the iPad offer?
Good question, once again. It isn’t a media PC, so that’s out. It isn’t good for enterprise level computing, that’s out. It can watch movies and read books, so coffee table literature, ok. Ignoring the touch screen and sleek design (which are just amenities, after all), it has to come down to the apps and features. The apps are limited, at this point, and I don’t really see much of that changing due to Apple’s app lockout situation.
Until Apple opens the platform up for general development, the platform will continue to be tightly controlled and, thus, limiting the applications that are available. Until this situation is resolved, this device may never end up anything more than a novelty.
HP’s slate cancelled
Looking back at history shows us that the tablet has had an extremely rocky past that always leads to failure. I’m not sure that even Apple can overcome this rocky past even with the success of the iPhone. The iPad is really too big and clunky to be truly portable. It’s too closed to allow open development. So, it’s no surprise that HP and other companies who had previously announced their intent to release a tablet are now reconsidering that release. In fact, HP announced the slate on the heels of Apple’s iPad announcement and has now cancelled the slate completely before it was even released.
Some people blame the ‘success’ of the iPad. Well, success is very much subjective. Putting 500,000 of the iPad into circulation is nothing to sneeze at. But, that doesn’t necessarily indicate success. The Newton comes to mind here. It was a hot new item that all but died in about two years. Where is the Newton now? Apple has a past history of deleting products rapidly and the iPad may be one of those items.
Apple’s past failures
If you really want an iPad, then get it now while it’s hot. Don’t wait. The reason I say this is that in 6-12 months, you could find yourself with a doorstop that Apple no longer supports. Apple has a history of killing off failing devices rapidly. So, with this particular device, don’t wait to buy it. If you wait until spring of 2011, you may find that the device is dead and buried. You could be holding a flat doorstop that iTunes no longer supports and with no active development. I can very easily see this device becoming one of Apple’s most recent failures.
Working while traveling
The tablet format has a questionable past anyway. The form factor isn’t pleasing to use. It isn’t easy to carry and, getting past the touch screen, it’s cumbersome to write text into it. So, it’s going to need a dock with a keyboard and mouse. A real keyboard and a real mouse. But, that takes the portability out of it. If you’re sitting on a plane, you’re locked into using the touch surface. Now consider that you can’t lay the device flat and work easily. I mean, you can lay it down, but then it’s not at the correct viewing angle. To get it into the correct viewing angle, you have to hold it in one hand, you have to balance it in your lap in a contorted way or you have to carry along a kickstand when you’re on a plane.
In this instance, a notebook, iphone, itouch or netbook works much better. For a netbook, the top pops open at the correct viewing angle and you have a real keyboard and mouse available. Granted, it’s not a touch surface, but that’s just a novelty anyway. Once the novelty of touch wears off, then you have to determine how to make use of this input method in an actual usable way.
Using an iPod touch or iPhone is also easy. It fits easily in one hand, is light in weight and works without the need for kickstands, contorted positions or clumsy positioning issues. Clearly, not a lot of usability was discussed when the iPad was designed. Usability is one of the things Apple usually prides itself in its designs. In the iPad, usability was clearly an afterthought.
3G iPad
This is the one and only one saving grace of the iPad. Internet everywhere is where we need to be. The supposed $29.95 monthly plan associated with the 3G version of the iPad is a reasonable price. Unfortunately, the iPad itself is marked up by an additional $130. So, instead of $499, it’s $629 (and that’s the smallest iPad). But, the iPad with 3G is the only version that I would personally consider. I already have an iPod touch and its uses are extremely limited unless you have WiFi handy (which isn’t very often). And, even when you do find a place that claims to have WiFi, 8 times out of 10, the connectivity is either slow or limited. So much for free WiFi. While 3G isn’t that fast, it’s at least always on pretty much anywhere you need it.
Form factor is the key to success
The problem with the current iPad is its size. This is the wrong form factor to release. It’s the wrong size and wrong weight. The size that the iPad should have been was about the size of a paperback book. Bigger than an iPod touch, small enough to fit in a pocket. This will take computing to the truly portable level. The screen will be bigger than a Sony PSP (which is a decent size to watch movies), but small enough to still be portable. Combine that with 3G and you have a device that people will want to use. The iPad is not that portable and still requires a case with handles. After all, you don’t really want to drop a $600+ device. But, a device the size of a paperback book at the cost of maybe $399, that’s in a price range that could work.
First Gen iPad
Remember that this is the first generation iPad. You really have to wait until the third gen of an Apple device to get to the features that make it worthwhile. The question remains, will the iPad even make it to a third incarnation? Only time will tell. Apple won’t abandon the iPhone OS on devices for quite some time. But, the form factor of the iPad is likely to change several times before it’s over. Like I said, if you want this thing, buy into it now. Otherwise, if you want to wait a year, you may not be able to get this form factor again and you may find that Apple has backtracked into smaller more portable devices.
Random Thoughts - Randocity! 
leave a comment