Slashdot Mirror


Google in Talks to Buy YouTube

tessaiga writes "The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Google is in talks to buy YouTube for about $1.6 billion. YouTube users watch more that 100 million videos daily, and the site's market share tops that of similar services offered by Google and other popular Web sites. This comes after a story earlier this morning that co-founder Sergey Brin is pushing for Google to cut back on the volume of products being offered, complaining that 'I was getting lost in the sheer volume of the products we were releasing'. Guess Google Video is one of the products making the approved shortlist."

34 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by ClosedSource · · Score: 5, Funny

    What do you want to bet that the programmers at YouTube would have never made it through Google's interview process?

    1. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is this 'funny'? 'Insightful' is more like it. Youtube is a piece of technological crap, yet it meets a social need. Much like MySpace. And both are wildly popular. Yet Slashdot persists in its belief that programming is the center of the universe.

    2. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by SilentChris · · Score: 5, Interesting

      YouTube is another one of those oddities. Like MySpace. Or VHS even. None of them are best in class, but they achieved a critical mass and took it from there.

      Stuff I hate about YouTube:

      1.) Takes forever to load some videos. Google Video is lightening fast.
      2.) Can't really shift to a point on the timeline. Unlike Google Video, it can't seem to pick up midstream. What's the point of even giving the user the option to move the timeline if you can't stream from that point?
      3.) Sometimes you leave comments and they aren't saved.
      4.) Regardless if the comments save or not, the page will completely refresh restarting the video. (No problem, you think -- I'll just fast forward to where I was. Wait, can't do that).
      5.) Sometimes pages flat out won't load. View the historic pages for stuff like "most popular video" and you'll sometimes see this.

      Not to mention the UI guys look like they threw up all over the screen, and the general content (like Google Video) is lacking. If you see one dumbass 14-year old kick someone in the crotch, you've seen them all. (On a sidenote, who are these teenagers that have all day to kick people in their crotch).

      I'm hoping one of these days people will realize, just like Tamagotchies, pet rocks and the Tubthumping song, that the only reason sites like YouTube and MySpace prevade culture are because they're popular. It has nothing to do with great content or inherently good design. All you need nowadays apparently is crap code and a userbase willing to kick people in the crotch.

    3. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by rednip · · Score: 4, Insightful
      who are these teenagers that have all day to kick people in their crotch
      uh, These guys
      I'm hoping one of these days people will realize, just like Tamagotchies, pet rocks and the Tubthumping song, that the only reason sites like YouTube and MySpace prevade culture are because they're popular. It has nothing to do with great content or inherently good design.
      Tell that to Craig's list as well. It's not 'how pretty', or 'technically advanced' a website is but how many people look at it, and how many people use it for what they want to present, even if it most of it isn't great, some stuff does shine (or at least funny as hell). Sure there are technical problems with YouTube, but they have the eyeballs, and the Google engineers should be able to fix it up quicker than anyone else.
      --
      The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
    4. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by faqmaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      YouTube is the Paris Hilton of the Web 2.0 crowd.

      --
      Are you...Are you some kind of genius?
      No, ma'am, I'm just a regular Slashdot reader.
    5. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by Mr2001 · · Score: 3, Informative
      Let's keep in mind that Google Video doesn't even allow you to post comments.

      Incorrect! The comment feature is still labeled as new, but it's been available for a while now. Look on the right side of the page, below the download button and the description of the video. There's a list of links, "Playlist - Details - From user - Related - Comments[New!] - Flag as inappropriate".
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    6. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by Jello+B. · · Score: 2, Funny

      To get Linux on the desktop we need users willing to be crotch-kickers.

      Nonsense, just set up a cron job.

    7. Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! by HishamMuhammad · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I think what's key in YouTube's early success over Google Video was that they required an older version of Flash, reaching a larger userbase. I remember not being able to open videos in Google Video but succeeding with YouTube, using some version of Konqueror. I assume the same applies to people running older browsers (say, IE5 on Win98), etc. The interface for comments might be quirky, etc (though it has improved recently), but they always excelled at compatibility for their videos -- and the streaming (at least from my end of the internet) was better.

  2. Google's a moron? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 4, Funny

    I didn't expect that!

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    1. Re:Google's a moron? by ergo98 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I didn't expect that!

      Well you still shouldn't -- while it might come to pass, I'd take this story with a massive grain of salt (mountain sized). The story comes from one unnamed individual, and is then circulated by some people that have a long history of rumors that didn't come to pass.
    2. Re:Google's a moron? by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Funny
      Methinks you misunderstand the meaning of 'grain of salt'.

      Somehow "a really tiny grain of salt" didn't sound right. I think the meaning is pretty clear and nonambiguous to anyone who doesn't literally parse a common saying. Basically I'm talking about readers who don't suffer from Severe Aspergers/Autism.
  3. I don't understand why they need to. by celardore · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely they'd only be buying the YouTube name. Google has way more hardware, and an already succesful video product out there. Maybe they are trying to eliminate the competition, and get the ad revenue all for themselves. Is YouTube really worth that much to them though?

    1. Re:I don't understand why they need to. by TrippTDF · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I just made this sam argument to a co-worker. If google buys them, they keep the name and start dumping the copy-protected matierial. They can keep the "trusted" brand and then use it to push TV/Movies that you can buy... Apple has iPod/iTunes, MS has Zune/WMP, and Google needs something if they want to compete here.

      My money has Google and MS getting slaughtered by Apple here.

    2. Re:I don't understand why they need to. by pyite · · Score: 4, Informative

      My money has Google and MS getting slaughtered by Apple here.

      Google is too smart to walk right into a battle with Apple. My guess is they will try to seek some mutually beneficial arrangement with Apple. Don't forget this.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    3. Re:I don't understand why they need to. by vertinox · · Score: 4, Funny

      Is YouTube really worth that much to them though?

      Maybe their "Don't be evil" clause also means keeping YouTube out of the hands of Newscorp.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  4. Well by valkabo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Its funny how every day the lines between google and microsoft blur. If microsoft tried this an unholy hell would be released..

  5. It makes sense... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google Video is probably the first example that comes to mind of the emergent Yet Another Half-Baked Google Technology phenomenon. By buying YouTube, they get a best-of-breed player on their side without diverting more in-house R&D resources. Given their (Google's) cash reserves, it's the right thing to do.

  6. compared to myspace by krotkruton · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IMO, this offer really seems to add credibility to the "myspace sale was a scam" theory.

  7. Isn't it up to the programmers? by ClosedSource · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "cut back on the volume of products being offered"

    Didn't we learn last week that you can work on anything you want at Google?

  8. Yeah... by CheeseburgerBrown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...it's amazing how not sucking works wonders for the way people interpret your actions and qualify the possible repercussions.

    1. Re:Yeah... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      MS-DOS didn't suck too badly compared to CP/M.

      Xenix didn't such compared to other UNIXes.

      OS/2 didn't suck, and neither did Windows NT next to desktop UNIX or DR-DOS+GEM

      Microsoft Word 2 didn't suck next to any of its competition.

      Microsoft have released more products that don't suck than Google (although, to be fair, I suspect most of us have been forced to use more of the ones that do suck). Google search has gone downhill a lot in recent months; I'm frequently finding searches fail to return any useful information, or if they do it's buried on page 3-4 of the results. Google is a young company, and they haven't had the time to screw up as badly as MS yet.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Yeah... by kwerle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      MS-DOS didn't suck too badly compared to CP/M.

      But it did suck compared to some of the multitasking DOS clones.

      Xenix didn't such compared to other UNIXes.

      Not sure on the timeframe or truth of that. Wasn't I using Dynix back in the day, and was that better than Xenix? I just don't know.

      OS/2 didn't suck, and neither did Windows NT next to desktop UNIX or DR-DOS+GEM

      Compared to NeXTstep, they all sucked. (OpenStep by the time NT came out)

      Microsoft Word 2 didn't suck next to any of its competition.

      When was WordPerfect released?

      Microsoft have released more products that don't suck than Google (although, to be fair, I suspect most of us have been forced to use more of the ones that do suck). ... Google is a young company, and they haven't had the time to screw up as badly as MS yet.

      Here is something Google has not done that Microsoft constantly has: squash competition through marketshare AND incompatability. To be fair, Google has to work with the 800lb gorilla in terms of file formats and the like.

      If Microsoft were buying youtube, the countdown would being as to when they stopped supporting any playback except Windows Media Player. And then they would make it WMP Vista, which would force you to upgrade. With Google, you just don't imagine that happening.

    3. Re:Yeah... by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2, Informative
      Compared to NeXTstep, they all sucked.


      Compared to NeXTstep, they all didn't require a $10,000 computer.
  9. Only a moron... by patrixmyth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Gotta love the related story on this one. Only a moron would buy Youtube, indeed.

    YouTube links are the only "You gotta see this." links that I get that I actually open on occassion. I think Google is making a great move here, if it's true. Given the other recent story about Google allowing google home page elements to be posted in websites, YouTube is a natural eyeball catcher to pull in people off personal websites.

    --
    "Don't you know you're going to shock the monkey?"- Peter Gabriel
  10. In other news ... by tekkguy · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news, Google has voted successfully to change the company's motto from "Don't be Evil" to "The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world!"

    --
    I want a 120 character signature! Please can I have a 120 character signature? I really really want one! 120 characters!
  11. Yeah, right. by merreborn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How'd that yahoo-facebook deal go? Not a single verification of the story in 2 weeks?

    Whaddya know. Not all rumors are true. Last time, it was 'industry executives', this time it's 'a person familiar with the matter'.

  12. The new name. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

    They plan to call it "GooTube."

    You don't want to know what the new logo looks like.

    1. Re:The new name. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lol. Goo in my first language means "shit". So how would you like to view shittube?

      I already have a television, thanks.

  13. Google and Branding by StreetStealth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Google hasn't really promoted the brand of any previous acquisitions, such as Writely... Seems to me they've mostly just ditched an acquisition's brand name and assimilated its tech.

    This then poses an interesting brand question: YouTube has, oh, about 10^4 times more brand equity than anything else Google has snapped up before, so how would we see this branded? Google YouTube? Google Video Powered by YouTube? YouTube powered by Google?

    --
    Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
  14. One request for both: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    An easy way to vote for duplicate movies! Quite often I find movies with an identical title, run-length and even preview icon. It would be nice if you could (similar to "flag as in-appropriate") you could flag them as "dublicate of:URL". This shouldn't of course remove the duplicates immediately, as one of them could be higher quality, but if there are enough votes it should group them in search results and combine reviews and ratings.

  15. Copyright by Arwing · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well a few things here
    1. Google is buying out their biggest rival in google video, by adding the huge library and viwership, google video will be the place to go for anything related to videos online and give the already high traffic on google related services a boost

    2. But it still doesn't solve the copyright problems google is going to face with RIAA and MPAA

    3. This tatic (buying out competitor) sounds a lot like something MS would do, is this a sign that google is finally in a stage of major corporation like MS?

  16. Am i the only one who thinks this makes sense? by sam991 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google video may be the technically superior service, but it is almost completely lacking in social interaction. Youtube encourages you to have a vlog, to post video responses etc. Google video (at least from the standpoint of a Youtube user) is a little cold.

    Google may well have the hardware, but they've a lot to learn about what makes a site popular. Myspace has to be one of the ugliest sites around yet its popularity is ever soaring because it is social. Google video just is not.

    At the end of the day, Youtube is synonymous with the online video hosting/sharing community and that is what Google are paying £850 million for. That and the ability to integrate with existing Google products (Google calendar & vlog combined? That's some powerful stuff right there.)

    --
    "No, no, no, don't tug on that! You never know what it might be attached to."
  17. Uh oh.. by clickclickdrone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Google look like their joining that happy band of companies that grew so big and had so much cash burning a hole in their pocket that they started buying insane companies for insane prices.
    1. Invent Google algorithm
    2. Invent Adsense
    3. Profit!
    4. Profit!
    5. Buy loss making company for huge amount of money
    6. No more profit!

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  18. Good for Apple? by Xyde · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Weren't there some (probably unsubstantiated) rumors floating around about iTV having direct access to Google Video? If so, Steve must be rubbing his hands together in glee about this. :)