JW Player vs. OBS Studio

JW Player has flexible plans that won't cost you a lot of money. If you are a startup, JW offers a variety of plans that will suit your specific needs and grow with you as your company grows. You do not need to be a video expert to understand how to upload a video, which allows nearly anyone in the office to do it.

Incentivized

From simple streaming to bigger events, OBS has been able to handle all of it with full confidence from us. Have never questioned if it was going to be unreliable in a specific situation, even with minimal training. Software identified the external input source easily and had no issues setting that up (Blackmagic Mini Recorder), and great for pulling in separate audio from the computer input.

Incentivized

• Responsive HTML5
• Provides share functionality built into the player
• Platform use enables playlist functionality and playlist players which can be customized or versioned for specific uses
• Videos uploaded to the JW Platform automatically provide multiple image frame options for selecting video thumbnail

Incentivized

• RTMP Streaming with customizable bitrate
• Scene Composition and Switching + source control which allows for creators and our customers to move between different types of content they might have (different video feeds, slides etc)
• Audio mixer and audio control - noise gating, a/v syncing, audio source control

Incentivized

• Definitely missing the ability (in and easy way) to have clickable links in the video.
• Analytics is a little cumbersome and not very user-friendly.

Incentivized

• OBS can be a little clunky sometimes, the lots of features can be a bit overwhelming
• I can multitask with it, but can't run heavy software like Premiere alongside it
• No way to make adjustments to file after it's done, have to use After Effects or Premiere for that

Incentivized

Just made the decision to renew given demonstrated improvements being made to the platform to expand compatibility for its player use on devices such as Apple TV, as well as improvements made recently to its JW Platform Dashboard

Incentivized

Reliability and compatibility on a majority of platforms. Would have received a 10 except recent versions of browsers such as Firefox are now defaulting against Flash components and thus prompting approval from users BEFORE loading which is a HUGE obstacle to an effective user experience thus creating concerns by end-users unnecessarily and risking that they will NOT accept the prompts, thus leaving unable to view video content hosted using the JW Player. Assurances by JW support suggest they will resolve this, so we'll see...

Incentivized

Very usable because it is free and has had a lot of people helping to suggest improvements and sponsors have allowed the product to grow in sophistication and suitability across a variety of situations and use needs. It is very logical to use once you get started, although the dashboard can seem intimidating at first.

Incentivized

Support is reasonable. I from time to time have made suggestions on improvements that would be nice to see (like the ability to have a clickable link within the video - that is easy to create, without tons of coding) and it seems as though I never see it happen or get much response to "suggestions" to upgrade the software. The good news, other than a few things as I mentioned above, overall, I don't have many "technical issues" in the platform, which is a good thing. On occasion, I have seen some "issues" with the delivery of the video, but it has been pretty scarce. So it is dependable.

Incentivized

For a free product, a range of support is available. There are plenty of ways to find out answers to questions, because there are probably thousands of people using the product who are willing to share what they have learned. It usually works as designed, so needs for support are limited.

Incentivized

One of the primary features promoted by JW Platform is its SEO definition. However, there did not seem to be a way to integrate that data to our platform if selected thus only leaving the benefits of that data to be established on the individual video page hosted by JW Platform, which isn't useful in the end to the client value we are trying to deliver for our VideoproFile.net solution

Incentivized

JW had more player options, a better/more intuitive user interface, was altogether faster both in rendering the uploaded videos and in time to load on the web page. The integration with OpenX for pre-roll was faster and easier than with Brightcove, and lastly, they offered a great price for service.

Incentivized

I have also used TinyTake by Mango Apps and I prefer OBS studio because the video quality results are better and OBS allows you to record an unlimited length of the video. OBS also lets you record an entire screen instead of manually having to draw your parameters, which can create oddly sizes videos if you miss by a few pixels.

Incentivized

• JW Player has was less expensive (without sacrificing quality) than our previous video platform so the ROI was instant.
• We were easily able to add a variety of video advertising options including pre-roll, mid-roll and post-roll.
• The quality and consistancy of the look of the video has enabled us to grow our video views by well over 100% since starting with JW.

Incentivized

• It was great to have a platform that is free that I can experiment with without having to use our business capital on.
• It took time to learn, but it helped me understand a lot of things, so it was a great learning experience.
• It was a great balance of cost and time with the high-quality product we got from it.

Incentivized