Youtube seems to offer a better user experience than facebook for users who don't have an account or aren't signed into an account. I have no data to back this up, but I suspect users with no accounts or users who aren't signed in account for a sizable portion of the youtube audience.
Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
31–40 of 87 posts
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't hardware (server space, bandwidth and latency) the real problem, with streaming video?
No, cost for that is constantly reducing. The problem is getting people to pay attention to what you make.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#33Youtube seems to offer a better user experience than facebook for users who don't have an account or aren't signed into an account. I have no data to back this up, but I suspect users with no accounts or users who aren't signed in account for a sizable portion of the youtube audience.
Youtube piggy backs on Google logins, so if you're signed into gmail, you'll be a logged in user.
Which for me is a big benefit when I'm not using a device that I own. I don't have to worry about logging in at all.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I definitely would not say it is a sizable portion. I'd say it is infact a minority of Youtube's audience. Their CEO revealed they have 1.8b logged in users [1] every month watching videos. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/3/17317274/youtube-1-8-billi...
But do they log in consistently? I log in by mistake every now and then, but I use it without being logged in 99.9% of the time.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, cost for that is constantly reducing. The problem is getting people to pay attention to what you make.
You do the same thing people do to get attention for their text blog - the usual publicity approaches.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#36Youtube seems to offer a better user experience than facebook for users who don't have an account or aren't signed into an account. I have no data to back this up, but I suspect users with no accounts or users who aren't signed in account for a sizable portion of the youtube audience.
I definitely would not say it is a sizable portion. I'd say it is infact a minority of Youtube's audience. Their CEO revealed they have 1.8b logged in users [1] every month watching videos. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/3/17317274/youtube-1-8-billi...
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#37The focus of Youtube is video whereas video is just another feature of FB. If I want to binge something in the background or watch AvE tear apart power tools (seriously, he's awesome) I go to Youtube. I've never gone to Facebook when I wanted to watch video content.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#38Youtube seems to offer a better user experience than facebook for users who don't have an account or aren't signed into an account. I have no data to back this up, but I suspect users with no accounts or users who aren't signed in account for a sizable portion of the youtube audience.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#39Youtube seems to offer a better user experience than facebook for users who don't have an account or aren't signed into an account. I have no data to back this up, but I suspect users with no accounts or users who aren't signed in account for a sizable portion of the youtube audience.
I think it's something a bit more general: Facebook is all about getting people to do, right now, what's good for Facebook, and it's willing to break things and get in your face to accomplish that.
Youtube, and Google generally, seem to be much more OK with just providing a consistent, approachable service; and letting the users use it naturally. In the long term, that seems like the better strategy because it doesn't burn trust like it grows on trees.
Re: Magazine publishers with video ambitions see YouTube as safer bet than Facebook
#40I've always seen Youtube as much higher quality than facebook. More than being accessible to everybody regardless of being logged in or not, their players have always been top notch for me. I've always associated Facebook videos with low quality content that I see scrolling through a newsfeed, and FB video has always been noticeably buggier than Youtube. The focus of Youtube is video whereas video is just another fea…
Youtube is a higher-quality video content site. It has lots of experience serving this type of content.
But as a social network, Youtube is gutter-quality, the worst of the worst. The kind of social network whose more disgruntled content providers are literally trying to murder the people running the site and whose comment section is infamous for being something like the most awful part of Internet.