Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Coming Soon To Cellphones
Krishna Dagli writes to mention a short New York Times article about a deal between Verizon and Google. YouTube will be coming to Verizon's VCast service. There's lots of catches: It's a $15/month fee, and you don't gain access to all of the content YouTube has to offer. Just the same, the article makes Google out to be thinking along these lines; YouTube may start showing up in many different places. From the article: "'Everybody carries a phone with them, but they may not have a computer,' said Steve Chen, chief technology officer and a co-founder of YouTube. People can 'take the phone out of their pocket while waiting for the bus' and watch a video, he added. Verizon Wireless and YouTube said the service would be available early next month. The companies would not discuss the financial terms of their deal but said Verizon would have the exclusive rights to distribute YouTube videos on mobile phones 'for a limited period of time.'"
what will creep out of such a relation ???
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
...that Verizon may also be implicated in any potential copyright infringement litigation over videos on YouTube? Or will the deal be structured so that Google shields Verizon in case that occurs? More importantly, is this a way for Google to ensure it's own little bit of "net neutrality," by making Verizon a partner?
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I thought cell phones were dead?
And the logical next step would be to offer discounts to people submitting more stupid videos shot with their cellphones.
I had this service for my phone about 18 months ago, and canceled it after a month... most videos took forever to start playing. In half an hour, you could maybe watch three or four 2 minute clips. The quality was OK for the phone, but all in all it was not the best viewing experience. Unless they have changed a lot in the last 18 months, I'm willing to bet this is going to be a big flop.
I love Google, but it seems that Youtube is becoming a monkey on their back- they paid a ton of money for it, and now they don't know what to do with it. Cell phones? Not the type of thinking I'm used to seeing with Google, but I'll hold off on a final judgment when I see it.
Verizon?
If they routinely break phone features like user-mp3 so they can charge money for crappy ringtones, what kind of charge would there be for downloading a whole video? When I got my phone last year, even the little "wallpaper" background images were for-pay, and if you switched from image A to image B to image A, you'd have to buy image A twice! Who in their right minds would pay-per-view for 92x64 bitmaps?
[
For a company who's motto is "Don't be evil.", it seems strange that they would go with the most evil cell phone company around (and believe me, the competition was fierce). I know several people up in the Northern Virginia area with Verizon and they all hate it, but due to exclusive licensing agreements Verizon is the only one that works on the Metro. If someone else got in there they would switch in an instant. The Verizon reps know this too, they treat you like dirt, have the worst phones, and still manage to be one of the most expensive options available.
I read the internet for the articles.
Sorry Verizon, http://tinytube.net/ beat you to it. And it's free.
With Verizon now charging users to access content contained on YouTube, doesn't that open the door even wider regarding charges of copyright infringement? Now that money is being exchanged for the service, it seems that copyright owners could now go after Verizon (and Google) for selling copyrighted material that isn't theirs to sell.
This guy's the limit!
The idea of watching Star Wars kid, that nervous sports reporter and bored skateboarding teenagers on my PHONE is surely too good to resist.
Do I really need to see lonelygirl15 and friends on my daily train commute? Oh wait, that's what I carry my notebook around with me for (work? bah!). Now I will be able to watch lonelygirl on my lap and Renetto in my hand. More tubes for me!
The big question is whether or not you were in an EVDO area. If you were, and your phone had it enabled, then Verizon definitely would have a problem. If you weren't or your phone didn't support it, then you probably would notice a difference between then and now. I just bought a KRZR (stupid name, nice phone) for my upgrade and I got a month of the VCAST music service for free. You can definitely notice a difference between EVDO and non-EVDO.
this really going to be that popular. I mean, look at this http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6137236.html story from last week, talking about how little people actually use their video ipods for video. I can't imagine cell phones being much different.
This is what happens with fads. It would be like giving yourself a mohawk. It'd be cool for about a day, but then you have to live with it for a while.
Working hard for you [to give us the money while still managing to give you the worst bang for your buck]
34486853790
Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
When Google paid for YouTube, the main question was the price vs "how to earn money with YouTube". This is a great move from Google, because they are able to get profits with YouTube and they are launching a new kind of service, with a giant. Congratulations google staff!
FTA:
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/verizon
- It's free (paying for just being "on the air" is expensive enough)
- I can start streaming videos within 5 secs
- I can send links to videos to my friends in e.g. SMSes.
I've talked with some people in the industry, and many of the suits seem to believe that if they can just get those kidz start using their crappy mp3/video/jambalaia/whatever-service they will all earn truckloads of bucks faster than you can spell GREED.Claiming to be pedantic on Slashdot is asking for trouble
*checks his pockets* Sorry, don't seem to have a phone on me. Oh that's right, now I remember, I DON'T HAVE A CELL PHONE MORON!
Why is it that people assume everyone has every worthless gadget out there? I know it's hard to believe but there are those of us who don't have a cell phone, don't need a cell phone and don't want a cell phone.
Just like there are those of us who don't have that insecure Flash product installed on our computers, don't need to have Flash installed and don't want to have Flash installed.
Technology is great and all but this nonsense that people should always have the latest and greatest crap is one of the leading causes for our negative savings rate.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Just when normal mobile phone ringtones and conversations on the bus couldn't get any more obnoxious. I tellya what, the first fool to start up Brookers Brodack on his phone on my way to work is getting thrown right through the breakaway fire-exit window.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
i mean, this does sound like a cool idea and all, but fuck paying $15 a month.. Google needs to do what it does really well, and that is to make their other services compatible with PDA Phones and Smartphone web browsers.. they did a great job with my personalized homepage, and gmail.. they should work on their own Video Search engine next in my opinion.. i use WiFi for any type of internet connectivity on my PDA phone.. not any of verizon's crappy wireless broadband services that aren't even offered in my area yet.. i can stream videos perfectly fine using windows media player for WM5.. i'm sure Google could easily get their player to cooperate.. Verizon needs to offer unlimited text messages to any one, not just to the people who are "IN", before they offer this YouTube service which will probably suck a lot of ass, and won't be worth the money..
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
So, for $15, I get to stream amateur videos to my cell phone?
How about, instead, I stream my own videos to myself using Orb and along with that, I can hit some online TV broadcasts, some internet radio, and prolly my mp3 collection (haven't tried that yet). And oh yea, one last thing: it's $0.
But yea, this Verizon/Youtube thing is cool too.
This will probably work as well as Netscape's paid browser. Remember, part of what makes YouTube attractive is that it's "free" and people don't seem to mind the many ads served on each page. (Ditto with Google.) Mess with the model and the next best video serving site will step up; the world doesn't need YouTube.
YouTube or Flash Works Fine on the Nokia N95
No extra charge, just pay for your usual data plan. N95 is a GSM phone. Other Symbian-based phones coming out should have same capability too.
Already got it in an interface that is far more comfortable to use.
Boost mobile phone (yo!) hacked blackberry 7520 to work on boost mobile with the sim from the first phone, Nokia 770 and some software installed.
I have unlimited net access 24/7 for $0.35 a day I can view most video content (dont because most is crap) plus get a real interface for web surfing, email, etc that wont cripple my thumbs or make me blind looking at a tiny 1.5 inch screen with low res.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This article How do I put YouTube Files on my Moto Razr? shows how to get them on one type of phone. Following the instructions, yeah I can view the videos. But really, how great is that? On the Motorola RAZR, the movies are 176x144 3GP files. Follow some of the steps in the article to turn the flash file from YouTube into a 176x144 video. The videos on YouTube are already lower res to conserve bandwidth. ESPN already made a similar play with their ill-fated Sports Heaven promotion. I took a YouTube snapshot of a CBS college basketball broadcast clip onto a RAZR and I cannot even see the ball, nor read the graphic scoreboard.
Have you Meta Moderated t
Everybody carries a phone with them, but they may not have a computer
/me cries. It's not that he is ignorant. It's that it got posted on slashdot.
For those who skipped Computer Science, a "computer" in the CS world, is something that has input, uses input to process something, and output. A cell phone is a computer, albeit not a PC. A PC is the "computer" we all know and use. A cell phone is a specialized computer.
It is not amazing that the cell phone can get video from youtube, that has always been possible. That it is provided as a service and there is guaranteed bandwith for it, however, is something of note. Not technological as much as the nerd factor.
Have you read my journal today?
Right... when people get bored they can start watching YouTube videos on their mobiles...
Bhavesh
Source to top search engine ranking
This is all lost on me, I watch live tv on my phone, it's got a web browser and java never had any problems with youtube - what kind of phones do you guys have that you'd need a special walled garden to access youtube and other sites ? I've had video on my mobile for years - I use it to upload clips from hockey games to youtube and photos straight into flickr - I thought everybody could do that (?)
Would that happen to be Google Video?
You must not have Verizon. Sorry 'bout that. My rant made little sense to begin with. It makes no sense with the "not" missing. *shrug* serves me right for not hitting preview.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
LOL! Another of Verizon's overpriced services I won't
be paying for. A decent mobile browser would be able to
surf to YouTube's site.
This is perilous. Our society has not yet resolved the problem of the internet's long memory. Most of our custom is built upon the now-obsolete idea that memory does not last long or spread very far. And so the birth of the Information Age has brought with it the personal catastrophes such as "Dog S*** Girl" and "Shemale Vids Guy" and that asshat Jason Fortuny. These are all examples of normal, limited outbreaks of personal information that turned into unjustified disasters for the affected persons, simply because the internet's memory is fast, broad, and permanent.
If everyone has a cellphone, and most cellphones have videocameras, and most of those videocameras are now linked up to YouTube, we'll see this memory problem greatly multiplied.
Of course that might be the antidote: put so much information out there about so many people, that it will no longer matter. It'll be a poor man's Friends of Privacy, which would be a Good Thing probably.
But I don't want to be one of the forerunners, having my personal foibles instantly broadcast all round the world, and googlable by every future employer, boyfriend, girlfriend, etc. This unholy marriage between YouTube and Verizon is fraught with peril.
"Let me go back and face the peril!"
"No, it's too perilous!"
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
Having worked in the cellular industry (or is it wireless device industry now?), I am willing to take a guess at what you will really "get" for this monthly fee.
You pay 15 dollars a month to gain access to a mobile site with the YouTube logo on it. Verizon will give you streaming access to video clips for upcoming movie releases, music videos (but only the first minute), and commercials for television shows.
Any clip you want to keep (for some asinine reason), will cost and additional 2.50.
No sig for you!!
Doesn't anyone find it ironic that YouTube has made billions off of the backs of all the free content basically donated to them to use on their site? What if the content creators/uploaders got a cut of that action? What if you uploaded content to YouTube that was DRM protected and in order to view it you had to pay the content creator?
I just looked up how to make my own DRM WMV files. You know what? You have to pay a third party if you want to make your own DRM content.
These DRM people have you coming and going. You have to pay if you wanto to view content, and, if you want to make your own DRM protected content, you have to pay someone for that, too!
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/social/?p=29
I can't believe you actually suggested DRMing a file on /. - LMAO
I subscribe to VCAST, I really enjoy the Comedy Central clips they have on there (Daily Show, Colbert, South Park). I can not view videos if I am not in an EVDO area. That said, a 3-4 minute video buffers and starts playing within 5 seconds or so. Video qualtiy appears to be slightly below NTSC when viewed on such a small screen. The $15 may not be worth it to some but it has been for me. News updates from the major networks, weather reports, sports updates (fox, espn, and some others), and they also have a comedy channel full of great clips. The VCAST service also allows me to connect my cell phone to my laptop and achieve at least dial up speeds for free. You have to pony up for the "high-speed" service though.
I know this is some real fuzzy math. I just think it is humorous that people are so quick to shoot something down when they don't have all the facts. About the wallpaper, put your own damn picture on there that you took with the phone. If that isn't kosher then transfer an appropriate picture from you computer on to a micro SD card and load it up that way. Shoot, pictures are for noobs anyway, I have a video shot with my home video camera loaded as my background wallpaper.
Thank you. I was thinking the same thing. "Look at me, I'm so leet I don't need a cell phone. I'm, like, totally fighting the establishment, man" What a tool. On a side note, I just recently got a cell phone in the last year. It has come in handy on more than one occasion and guess what, when I don't want to talk with people I *gasp* turn the phone off. It's like magic.
I've been watching YouTube on a Treo 700P for weeks using Kinoma with Sprint and there's no content filtering or billing. Why is this suddenly news?
And the first wave is typically underwhelming. Look at video on the Internet - there were many companies developing web applications similar to Youtube back in the dot-bomb era: DEN, Popcast, etc. My team developed one for Sony that was never deployed, but would have likely failed anyway.*sigh* But the "ecosystem" just wasn't ready: Most of the population didn't have the broadband access necessary for a good experience. To make matters worse, a lot of questionable business models were applied to this underdeveloped ecosystem. I believe video on mobile will be a phenomenon in the near future, but will only happen when the ecosystem reaches a critical point where:
1. A significant percentage (>20%) of consumers have EVDO/HSDPA or better bandwidth and are using decent mobile devices (like the Nokia N series)
2. A service emerges that builds a bridge between the Internet and mobile devices that is suitable for mass adoption:
- A free service (ad supported like Youtube on the web)
- That offers automated transcoding of content for mobile users
- And solves distribution and discovery challenges that are specific to the mobile space.
The Gootube/Verizon deal is not the answer. Guess what I'm spending all my time on these days?