| 2:51 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Not only did it require a special app, but at least the mac version was clunky and poorly put together. It had the feel of a new developer's first shareware application.
Good move on their part, although they could just have easily gone the route of expanding their video upload app to be easy to use and have some actual use (like browsing/watching videos and managing your videos on your own computer). There's probably still space for a specialized app like that.
| 6:47 pm on May 17, 2006 (gmt 0)|
nothing earth shattering about the tech, search a movie database, view movie.
What is astounding is googles lack of credit to the publisher, no profile page, just an unclickable url. So, this is really google branding, we takes your content, no credit for you. do no evil to G$! Bad google, another shining example of total disrespect for those who make the medium happen.
youtube.com has a nice profile deal set up so that you can learn more about the person uploading, go to their web site etc., pretty cool (and fair).
| 1:50 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm not on the Video team, but I wanted to note that -- at least with the videos I checked out -- the content creators' site URLs were fully clickable.
With that said, I definitely see your point that we could do more to "show off" the person submitting the video via extended profiles, etc.
| 2:30 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Welcome to WW, Adam.
| 2:37 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well while we are just at it, the guidelines could be improved. I had a video about spiders rejected that didn't eat anything, was filmed by me, featured music of wikimedia. There was nothing illegally copied, illegal, pornographic, obscene in it. All you get is a moronic link to a TOS page and you can start thinking what the bloody hell is up with the censor. Incidently three other videos about tarantulas by me get accepted. I have in total over 50 posted and suddenly some creationist seems to review the videos...
G seriously needs to learn to give precise reasons and COMMUNICATE.
Anyway I post G rejections now on youtube which also works fine for embedding.
| 5:53 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I guess the fact that Adam has joined WebmasterWorld is bigger news (to webmasters) than the actual topic of this thread. Welcome, Adam!
| 11:55 am on May 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Welcome to WebmasterWorld [webmasterworld.com], Adam_Lasnik!
Although it looks like this thread [webmasterworld.com] was Adam's informal introduction to WebmasterWorld. ;)
| 5:05 pm on May 19, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Adam_Lasnik thanks for posting.
Can I mention the youtube features that I find enjoyable?
First is the better chaching of the file. Once I have loaded it in youtube it is loaded, G video seems to want to stream it again.
Second I really enjoy being able to "subscribe" to someones videos so that as they add more I have an easy "at a glance" availablity to them.
I understand that G has to be more careful about copyrighted content as someone will go after G before youtube as they have the deeper pockets but the approval process IMO for G seems to take longer.
Perhaps some integration with /ig would be nice. If I could get an RSS of all the videos by a certain people that would be great.
| 5:47 pm on May 19, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I like your ideas :)
I do think the approval process is faster now. I remember when some of my uploads took several days; now most of them (as of an update yesterday) should be approved as quickly as instantaneously. Note that they may not be searchable immediately, though.
Back on your ideas, though... have you suggested them directly to our Video team [video.google.com]? If not, I recommend doing that!