Simon Hall

To clarify, the MOBOTIX ONVIF/H.264 roll out plan is as follows: - Step 1. release MxMultiviewer to allow integration of MOBOTIX and ONVIF/H.264 (non-MOBOTIX) devices under one central software platform - Step 2. incorporate H.264 into MOBOTIX cameras (announced by MOBOTIX in a March 2015 press conference) On 23 January 2015, ONVIF welcomed MOBOTIX in as a full member, so after step 2 is in place, implementing ONVIF compliance with their hardware would seem to be the logical corollary. No official date has been announced for this third step.

MOBOTIX recently announced their soon to be released software platform, MxMultiViewer, will allow the integration of ONVIF and H.264 IP video devices. This means both MOBOTIX and third party IP cameras can be integrated under one platform (for both OS X and Windows). The word is MOBOTIX have plans to also introduce the ONVIF/H.264 integration within an iOS app, which will resolve the OP's requirement. There has been no official launch date from MOBOTIX for MxMultiViewer but a beta version has already been made available, which indicates it's not too far off. pTSWDRe703I

MOBOTIX recently announced they will be integrating ONVIF and H.264 within their new software platform pTSWDRe703I

The M15 production was delayed, with its official release back in June 2013... We have published a video tutorial of the MOBOTIX M15, that includes the hardware specs here >> MOBOTIX M15 Hardware Overview

Here are three tutorials showing how to set up a decentralized IP camera for NAS recording: Record to a QNAP NAS Record to a Netgear NAS Record to a Synology NAS

Learn how to setup automatic switching between Exposure settings, so that the MOBOTIX camera can capture better quality images during day and night illumination. To learn more refer to pages 29-37 of this new automatic exposure settings tutorial in our latest ANPR guide http://www.mxinstaller.com/blog/mobotix-anpr-guide-v2/

If anyone is having recording issues, please refer this tutorial which covers best practice for setting up MOBOTIX recording http://www.mxinstaller.com/tag/boost-recording-and-playback/

This is an old post, but wanted to clarify something separate to the OP's question... He set up MOBOTIX cameras to record to a QNAP "VS" NAS. The VioStor series NAS has recording software installed. Note - if you only have MOBOTIX cameras recording on the system please do not buy NVRs. The NVRs proprietary database often interferes with the MxPEG image recording quality and the limits the camera's functionality. My advice is to just record directly to NAS - in this case the QNAP "TS" series would be a better choice for MOBOTIX.

All the answers to the OPs questions are found here... http://www.mxinstaller.com/tag/mobotix-qnap/

Good point to clarify...thanks buellwinkle H.264 for VoIP (telephony video) streaming yes, which H.264 is great for, but not recommend for surveillance recording.

Firstly I want to apologize to the OP (USA Ed) and the community for the emotional hijacking...I know the original post is 2010, but I would like to get this back on the topic of "MOBOTIX vs H.264" (in terms of surveillance recording), as it's an important one. I want to offer some usable information to those who have clicked to get answers on the subject. Here's two interesting articles I would recommend...I will be back with some more later... JPEG2000, MJPEG, MPEG and H.264 in the security environment http://www.initsys.net/attachments/Compression%20and%20DigitisationPDF.pdf This is an interesting read which includes quotes from the MPEG committee with their thoughts on using H.264 and MPEG codecs in surveillance. H.264 considerations http://www.iqeye.com/iqeye/H.264_Considerations.pdf Article by vendor IQInvision who manufacture megapixel IP cameras. (quote) "Select H.264 when your requirements dictate that saving bandwidth is more important than consistent image quality or predictability in bandwidth or storage needs."

Maybe you have not been in communique with an ad rep from MacWorld - they actively engage potential advertisers on how they can promote third party products to the Apple community - it's a great model and creates win/win for both vendor and reader. Most of Macworld's content is about what-else-works-with-Apple. BTW that is not our mission statement, it's one of the many services we provide to vendors to enable us to fund MxInstaller magazine, so that it can be distributed to the community free of charge. I addressed your comments relating to the tutorial and MxPEG, for the rest of the community, because they were incorrect.

MxInstaller to MOBOTIX is like what Macworld is to Apple...no more - no less. The Hidden Cost of H.264 tutorial does not in anyway suggest that the decentralized recording platform is achieved through implementing MxPEG. To clarify - the merits of MOBOTIX camera's being able to write in a recording database format direct to storage, is because the VMS is installed in the cameras not a computer. It's this attribute that enables the cameras to write directly to a file share. You might want to check out a YouTube tutorial which explains this further. The purpose of the The Hidden Cost of H.264 tutorial is to primarily highlight key issues at the source and head-end. The high cost of using H.264 in video surveillance is created because most IP camera systems are centralized, so all recordings must be streamed to a central NVR - unless you don't want storage, event handling and recording database management. High resolutions centralized recording systems require high cost PC/Servers, not to mentioned licensed VMS which can cost anyway up to $200+ per camera license for the privilege of being able to record. In these systems the bandwidth advantages to H.264 become irrelevant because the cameras have to stream the data to a central point on the network. You could of course deploy NVRs at the edge but that - again - is expensive. There are of course other issues with using H.264 which have become more apparent over time. These are excellent examples of the inherent qualities of MxPEG, which were required outcomes factored in during the development process, but what you have listed are not the "real reason" why MOBOTIX developed MxPEG. The real reason is two-fold... 1. Frame-for-frame capture MPEG codecs are great for streaming but inappropriate for surveillance. MOBOTIX saw that a codec needed to be developed specifically for the requirements of surveillance, designed to capture and record frame-for-frame movement and scene changes in high quality. 2. Scaling Being non-CPU intensive, MxPEG enables systems to up-scale in camera numbers and resolution with minimal impact on hardware. EDIT... For anyone else who may be confused about the key points in this video, below, we have broken it down: vQaTjSs0cvc Timeline 1:29 -2:20 Powerpoint slide from an Axis presentation showing the encoding/decoding of H.264 has higher complexity requiring more CPU power. 2:20 - 2:41 In a centralized surveillance it's the processing requirements and cost server-side, that represents the hidden cost of H.264 2:42 - 3:54 CPU requirements for recording using Axis VMS, based on Axis Camera Station calculations 3:55 - 5:16 CPU requirements for recording using Milestone XProtect calculator 5:56 - Cost of server-side is lower with a decentralised system because of lower coding complexity, no VMS licensing, no PC/Server required. H.264 further compounds the costs associated server side in a centralized system. Key points • H.264 IP cameras are designed for centralized systems requiring dedicated servers, licensed software and high CPU to process. H.264 has brought with it unprecedented complexity that requires more processing power, thus more cost, server-side, than ever before - which many are not aware of. (These costs had, back in 2008, not been openly addressed.) • The MOBOTIX decentralised platform, enables direct-record-to-storage recording which is made possible by the VMS in the camera, not MxPEG. • MOBOTIX has the ability to record to any type of storage media - no dedicated VMS server required • The MxPEG codec requires very little hardware processing as compared to H.264 I would also recommend this video as a follow to explain further the decentralized IP video concept.

I understand that VRM manages traffic for the purposes of storage management. I mentioned VRM in the context of NVR, as Bosch charge a license fee for VRM. You don't have any licensing fees with MOBOTIX. The central storage management feature applied by VRM, to prevent storage overwriting etc, is already built into the MOBOTIX camera. I believe the load balancing can and should be handled by the storage unit without additional cost applied by the camera vendor. Most quality storage devices will offer this as standard. MOBOTIX don't peddle iSCSI or any other defined storage platform, as the cameras can direct-record to any and all standard digital storage media.

This is not correct, even in 2012 Bosch do not offer full VMS in the camera. With Bosch you are required to record to iSCSI disk arrays, which are very expensive, and even for direct-to-iSCSI installations, Bosch always recommends a VMR or NVR - just like 90% of camera vendors. With MOBOTIX each camera is a DVR, so it can create its own recording database, meaning you can record direct to any standard media (DA/NAS/DS).

The S14 is not currently shipping, but is expected to be released very soon. Don't believe release dates until it is officially announced by MBOTIX. One of the major draw cards for the S14 is its ability to stream dual hemispheric video. The S14's super tiny form factor will mean, it can be installed in areas with very little available space. Lenses stitched into clothing (e.g. military uniform and equipment), will be a reality.

We have posted an image comparison of what the day and night lenses look like in the same scene, along with an explanation, here http://www.mxinstaller.com/blog/d14-fixed-lens-and-panorama-cameras/

If you want to know what defines a quality storage device then check out this tutorial on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O9ypphv504 A product that is "good enough" is defined by two things: a). the needs of the application (no. of cameras x recording x storage etc) b) AND the expectations of the customer Storage selection should be based on the above two factors first, not price. I am in communication with installers from around the world on a daily basis, and I have found that those who win business consistently don't achieve this by being the cheapest. They align the right technology to the needs of the site. They consult with the customer first. While every customer has a budget, they should be presented with options with expected outcomes explained for each. Remember you are the expert who has been called in to help them. With this in mind, the installer should never assume they are doing the customer a favor by specifying cheap storage. If the customer insists on going with the cheapest, then they should be informed of the consequences. This is important. The customer will not thank you later if you saved them $300 on their storage, but data is lost because there was insufficient storage or power redundancy. An installer should always ask when talking about storage needs - "How much are the video recordings worth to you? Can you afford to lose recordings?" I have yet to meet an end user that is happy with the higher probability of losing recorded sequences, by going cheap. Remember, customers dont deal with security everyday, so they have to be reminded as to why they are installing a security system, and what the most important factors within that decision are. In regards to which product is good enough...consider this scenario: a) needs of the application are... • 12 cameras recording at 6fps on event @ 1.3 megapixel resolution • recording activity low • storage - 14 days b) expectations of the customer • the client has made it absolutely clear that recording footage can never be missed or lost. I would be offering options, but would highly recommend they go with a NAS and UPS back up and configured to RAID 10, rather than RAID 5. Then explain to the customer how that is aligned with their expectations. Here's another scenario: a) needs of the application are... • 12 cameras recording at 12fps on event @ 1.3 megapixel resolution • recording activity very high • storage - 30 days b) expectations of the customer • the client has agreed that a maximum downtime of recording is allowable (e.g. 3 hours, 1 day). Then I would be presenting options, but recommending a NAS that will cater to the higher write speed, so Intel Dual Core and configured to RAID 5. Then explain to the customer how that solution is aligned with their expectations. A good installer is always consultative during the pre-sales visit, they find out what is most important to the customer in regards to capturing and recording, and then presents options. BTW dont think cheap storage can be a potential problem for the end user only - they are often a constant source of problems for installers and I'm not just talking about write speed or redundancy - there's also NTP issues, power supply failure, board fatigue...seriously it's just not worth it!

Yes JBOD has been common practice with traditional DVR system, but it's kind of ironic when you consider that the storage component of those security systems is not secure. Anyway, times have changed. Cost is simply no longer an excuse not to install a RAID device. In fact a quality NAS with key features such as RAID, Auto-Restart on power failure, Intel CPUs and 24/7 HDD can easily fit into even very small budgets. It seems many installers are simply not aware of the available options and assume thousands of dollars have to be spent to get quality storage or conversely somehow seem convinced that a $200 NAS is good enough - which is simply not the case for most surveillance systems. I will be covering these details in a NAS report as a guide to installers as to storage options. This will published in the April 2012 edition of MxInstaller magazine.

As a final note - another important storage device consideration apart from what has already been mentioned, is - will the NAS autoboot after a temporary power outage and reconnect to the network? I am amazed at how many installers opt for a cheap NAS to cut cost, but also do not include some sort back up power supply (UPS) for that very same reason. Their logic? "what are the chances of that actually happening?" I'm constantly hearing of cases where someone has installed a NAS device that does not have the auto-boot feature, and worse, has not been connected to a UPS. One day it's found turned off and of course not recording due to a 10-second power outage that had occurred sometime weeks earlier. The discovery is usually made by the end user who is wanting to search for an incident but finds they can't. Due diligence is key. If the customer is bothering to pay someone to install a recording device for surveillance purposes, are they really benefitting by going with a $200 storage device? Have they been made fully aware of the potential downsides by going cheap? If the customer values highly, 24/7 recording uptime, if it's something that is of absolute importance to their site, then they will see the viability of buying a quality storage solution. This approach assists the end user and protects the installer.

It's interesting because a Google study (EDIT: into hard disk failure), also found "Failures do not increase when the average temperature increases. In fact, there is a clear trend showing that lower temperatures are associated with higher failure rates. Only at very high temperatures is there a slight reversal of this trend," But I agree with you, I have found increase in heat (generally caused by lack of ventilation) creates performance issues and failure rates. My earlier post was not about HDD alone, it was just one example I was giving. It's about going for best quality. I have found over the years that Enterprise drives do perform better, and dont really cost a lot more, but of course its up to the installer. However, there are other factors to consider, CPU, OS etc. Better quality NAS use higher class CPU (e.g. Intel Atom Dual Core), this is important when using RAID. Because most NAS are based on software RAID, the consistency of the write performance is determined by how well the CPU can manage the RAID component. Differing levels of RAID required more or less CPU power. Either way MOBOTIX offers loads of options in terms of storage. More than any other camera manufacturer. This means you can use lower cost NAS - but it should only be used where it suits the application. My aim in my posts here is to help installers be aware of the potential issues and think about aligning the right storage device with the system requirements. I get a lot email through on a weekly basis with storage questions, and those that are having recording issues have in most cases under-specified the storage device, either through lack of capacity or write speed. For example: one retailer had setup up 7 x cameras to record at 12 frames per second in 3.1 megapixel to a $290 D-Link NAS, which caused recording problems simply because the device couldn't handle the write throughput.

A Google study also revealed that "drives less than 6 months old show a decidedly higher probability of failure when put into a high activity environment". The one consistant factor I have found to be true: hard drive life is determined by data throughput. So if you were to compare the life expectancy of the same hard drive in two different scenarios: camera system writing 300 event sequences a day, or a camera system writing 3000 sequences a day - the drives would last longer in the site recording fewer sequences. Why? high writing means increased mechanical wear.

Agreed. But prior to installation, the end user should be given the opportunity to choose between "data safety vs. cheap storage". As long as the customer clearly understands what a $200 storage system will deliver as opposed to a $1200 solution, so they can then make an informed decision. While it's true you can be alerted to hardware failures, the question is, how long will it take to repair and what is being missed in the meantime? Is the customer prepared to take that hit in terms of loss of recording during the window of time it takes to repair? You dont need to spend anywhere near a "few thousand" for a quality recording system. You can easily obtain a quality NAS chassis and HDD all online for around $1200 - that would give you 1TB, RAID and Enterprise class SATA drives. EDIT - Here's a NAS offering 2TB storage, Intel Atom Dual Core D525 CPU, Constellation ES HDD (Enterprise class SATA), 90MB/sec write speed PLUS 5-year warranty, for under $650. Reference: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/nas-reviews/31471-new-to-the-charts-netgear-readynas-pro-2 $200 might be good value for storing photos and holiday videos, but for surveillance? Maybe for a very small installation recording at very low frame rates, where the higher probability of losing recorded footage through using a cheap storage device is not an issue to the customer. I am hearing from so many installers reporting failures through using consumer-grade storage such as D-Link DNS range, Lacie d2 and WD "My Book" series. It takes me back to the days as a product manager selling Milestone XProtect systems, and having to go out onsite to help out installers and integrators who had deployed the VMS application on cheap "non-RAID PC/Server" solutions, in an effort to cut cost (or increase profit). The end result usually being, system recording errors and loss of footage. In terms of recording to NAS, it seems the low end 1 and 2-bay devices are the most problematic. These have been especially an issue in sites where some of the cameras are recording continuously. A lot of this has to do with write error and drive failure. It's not surprising as constantly writing video is arduous and taxing on the recording hardware. This is why choosing good quality components is so important. Take just one example - hard drives... There is a reason for the manufacture of both Enterprise class and Desktop class drives. One is made for continuous I/O the other is not. Enterprise-Class disks are purposely designed for RAID environments and proactively remap and then repair defective sector within seconds, to prevent potential read/write failure. These attributes are critical for most surveillance applications. Desktop-Class are not equipped for this. But at the end of the day, as long as the customer clearly understands the pros and cons of "data safety vs. cheap storage" and makes an informed buying decision based on that, then the integrator has done his (or her) job.

I totally agree with thewireguys (quote) "I would skip the cheap units." We have accumulated quite a bit of data based on our own lab tests and feedback from installers using various brands of NAS. We've listed the ones that seem to be the most commonly problematic. See link below... http://www.mxinstaller.com/blog/choosing-the-right-nas-for-your-mobotix-system Hope this helps.