Arlo|Smart Home Security|Wireless HD Security Cameras

Re: Arlo Ultra Camera Firmware Update

Reply
Discussion stats
  • 13 Replies
  • 363 Views
  • 0 Likes
  • 5 In Conversation
Highlighted
Guide
Guide

Got the firmware update and now the "2K" videos that are capture can not display in Fire Fox, even though they are smaller in size to the previous videos capture.

Another step backwards. Now I have to down load and open a video application to view a file. 

Why have the cloud? Can I just access the memory card on the arlo server? Activity zone won't work unless wired, and now can't view either.

 

I think I'll read the manual again to see how Arlo addresses this.

Firmware update, system performance degrade - unfortunate.

 

Model: VMC5040 | Arlo Ultra Wire-Free Camera
Highlighted
Guru Guru
Guru

Most browsers, including FF, don't display any video >1080p due to licensing issues/costs. If you want the higher resolution, use the app to view or download and view separately. It's a browser issue.

Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy

The only browser that was working was edge.  I say was working.  Now when windows updates to the new edge chromium they no longer work and your forced to download to view.  Kind of makes a cloud service pointless.  They force it on you with the update and won't let you uninstall it.  It is a money issue, the HEVC extension was free but as costs went up Microsoft started charging for it and now you can't even get it for the new edge.  None of the browsers want to pay the fee.  So unless your computer can do it with just hardware or Arlo changes from HEVC it's not worth the subscription.  I can just use the SD if I want to download every file I wish to view.  For now I was able to restore windows to the day before the update and edge chromium and it's working again.  Delayed updates for the 35 days allowed and am looking at a reg edit that prevents Chromium from installing when windows updates.

Highlighted
Guide
Guide

Jguerdat, Thanx for your response, but that is not the problem!

All four Ultra wireless camera WERE working fine for 9 months (except they have to wired for certain features)

Something changed possible coincident with a firm ware update.

Now ONE of FOUR cameras records with a note that it is "2K" and therefore no longer easily viewable.

                                     I do not disagree with you on capability of browser - NOT the issue!

Why is only 1 of 4 recording a a "2K" mode?

Because it is so inconvenient, how do I get it back to the mode it was in for the first nine months

 

Not trying to get a a browser to do something it can't.

 

The  problem it is reduction in performance coincident with a firmware update.  If it is not a firmware cause, then what is causing one camera to record in a "2K" mode?  Just another cause and effect question.

 

Thank you for responding; I agree with you about the browser capability - not the issue

Highlighted
Guide
Guide

LandJS, Thank you for your response!

You address very well the capability of the browser as well.

Does this mean that both of you think that the firmware update casued one camera to go into an increased density format recording more?

You also address very well the loss of benefit of the subscription. Thank you.

In a separate thread I have addressed that the wireless ultra has only features if it is wired and on subscription. Not fully disclosed on any advertising, quick start-ups, or brochures, but can be found as a "Note" in the manual.

With my system I thought I bought a fully capable (activity zones et al) wireless camera system that I could easily view in my browser. After nine months I have learned that the activity zones only work if wired and I can't view on of four cameras in a browser; so clearly the benefit of the subscription is questionable.

 

What really gets me is the answer to these technical questions don't get a response! What they do get is well meaning individuals suggesting possible recommendations/solutions. Some engineer at Arlo knows the answer; if not then that speaks volumes.

Thanx again for your insight.

 

Highlighted
Guru Guru
Guru

@411TTWB wrote:

 

Now ONE of FOUR cameras records with a note that it is "2K" and therefore no longer easily viewable.

                                     I do not disagree with you on capability of browser - NOT the issue!

 


Well, the truth is that it is a browser issue.  Edge can play 2K or 4K recordings (though with the new Edge it does require hardware support in the PC).  But FireFox and Chrome cannot.

 

If you were accessing recordings from this camera with FireFox before, then you were recording in 1080p.  For instance, if you had the track and zoom feature enabled for the camera.

Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy
Yes but that doesn't mean arlo can't use a format that is supported. After all that is the point Microsoft is making just like they have all been doing with Adobe. If not arlo is handicapping many of their users and their rep is already sinking fast. Except for a few.
Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy

@LandJS   What formats are supported that are not browser related?

Highlighted
Guru Guru
Guru

@LandJS wrote:
Yes but that doesn't mean arlo can't use a format that is supported. After all that is the point Microsoft is making just like they have all been doing with Adobe. If not arlo is handicapping many of their users and their rep is already sinking fast. Except for a few.

 

This is about the codec that is integrated into the camera hardware - not something that can be changed with a bit of software.  The camera hardware supports HEVC (H.265) and AVC (H.264).  HEVC is used for 2K and higher resolutions, because it provides 2x the compression performance of AVC. 

 

I guess Arlo could transcode it in the cloud, but that would require significant cloud resources (and would be a problem if you use direct access to local storage).  Transcoding would further reduce the quality (even if the AVC conversion output 2x the bitrate).

 

Personally, if I were in Alro's shoes I'd provide a Windows and Mac App that included an HEVC player.

 


@LandJS wrote:
 After all that is the point Microsoft is making

No idea what  you mean by this bit.  What point do you think Microsoft is making?

Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy
I really don't care how they deal with it as long as they deal with it, a app is fine if it works on a pc but if it requires most to have to download a video to view it then it's pointless. May as well just watch your SD, except they limit that to. As for what I mean about Microsoft. They have made it clear that their response to Adobe player is because they don't believe others are moving as they should to change. They could have waited until the end of 2020 and that's it but they make you click on allow Adobe every time as a message to them for not changing fast enough. They aren't behind 265 because of the cost and believe there are other options and are making that point. We all know your happy but your one customer. Read these threads and your in the minority.
Highlighted
Guru Guru
Guru

@LandJS wrote:
 As for what I mean about Microsoft. They have made it clear that their response to Adobe player is because they don't believe others are moving as they should to change.

Arlo stopped using flash quite a while ago now - and I don't see why you are still talking about it, as it seems completely off-topic.   

 

Chrome is my everyday browser, so I am directly affected by the compatibility issue.  Using Chromium Edge is an ok workaround for me - I do find it much better than the older legacy Edge.  But my preference would be to use Chrome.

 

HEVC is newer and better technology than AVC.  It's not in Chrome or Firefox because Google and Mozilla didn't want to deal with the patent royalties.  Although you are dismissive, this is an area I work in professionally (not linked to Arlo), and I definitely know what I am talking about here.  https://www.eetasia.com/patents-and-standards-create-licensing-woes/ is one of many articles on the topic that you might take a look at. 

 

FWIW, H.266 (VVC) is now standardized.  It's much better than HEVC.  But unfortunately it appears to be headed down the same patent road taken by HEVC.  It's a shame.

 

 

Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy

your field as to what I was pointing to matters not.  I was building and programming computers back in the 80's , I dealt with DOS and was through every beta test from the start of windows, big deal.  My only point is just as they did with adobe which did require clicking on allow adobe every time you tried to view arlo, Microsoft, Google and others do make a point of doing so on purpose to force you or a business to change.  As you yourself pointed out browsers  are doing so because they don't want to pay the fees.  There will always be better and more advanced options showing up and you have to work with them to be successful.  Arlo chose what they chose and if they can't make it work or chose something that doesn't work for most then they should have chose differently.  In my opinion anyway because most other systems are viewable without download and therefore Arlo is limited to my cell phone now that the new edge is saying no more there are other options.

Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy

@LandJS 

Are you saying you can see other 2k or 4k video or recordings  but just not  alro recordings in browsers?

Highlighted
Prodigy
Prodigy

I can watch the Arlo in 2K and 4K as long as I use the old edge browser or you tube even but once edge is updated to the new edge chromium I can no longer view Arlo as it no longer supports HEVC unless you have a computer that does so completely through hardware.  The thing is Microsoft is forcing the new edge on you when it does an update as they have with other things.  I was able to go back using restore to a previous date to get the old edge back the next update, same thing, back to restore and turned off updates which you can only do for 35 days.  So either Microsoft goes back to supporting it or Arlo comes up with a solution for viewing other than having to download.  The other browsers just refuse to pay the fee.  I'm not a apple fan but they may support it in their browser, I don't know there.  However Apple has always been pretty much their way or no way.

Discussion stats
  • 13 Replies
  • 364 Views
  • 0 Likes
  • 5 In Conversation