When comparing Flussonic Media Server vs Contentflow, the Slant community recommends Contentflow for most people. In the question“What are the best software tools for live streaming?” Contentflow is ranked 20th while Flussonic Media Server is ranked 31st. The most important reason people chose Contentflow is:
You can live stream across multiple platforms. You can distribute your stream(s) simultaneously to several Facebook accounts, Youtube Live, Twitch, and other social media platforms
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Easy to use and configure
Easy to integrate with other Flussonic servers. Development doesn't stop. They keep updating their software and enhancing the experience and the capabilities.
Pro Multistream
You can live stream across multiple platforms. You can distribute your stream(s) simultaneously to several Facebook accounts, Youtube Live, Twitch, and other social media platforms
Pro Subtitles
Subtitles can be created automatically and in an impressive quality.
Pro Video file
The video is available immediately after the livestream for download in different resolutions.
Pro Own player
A video player, which can be integrated into any website, is included. On request also with a chat.
Pro Cutting
It is possible to cut content from the running stream and export or publish it.
Pro Teamwork
Pro Graphics
Graphics, such as a logo, can be displayed
Cons
Con Sometimes updates break the config file and sometimes things are changed drastically
This may prompt you to redo and reconsider your setup. It's not recommended to update Flussonic unless you have time and make sure the server you're updating is not serving customers.
Con It's expensive
1000 dollars per month.
Con Graphic
Unfortunately the graphics cannot be changed during the stream.