Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Video Becomes Search-Only, YouTube Holds Content

Posted by Zonk on from the one-falls-while-the-other-rises dept.

Bangor writes "Google is planning to turn Google Video into a search index of all the world's available video online. The change will see YouTube becoming Google's only platform for user-generated video and premium content sales, and Google said that YouTube content would be immediately added to the Google Video search index. The company plans to expand that to eventually include all video online. From the article: 'The company said that they 'envision most user-generated and premium video content being hosted on YouTube,' which clearly suggests that the Google Video storefront will eventually give way to YouTube.'"

5 of 119 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Too bad by painQuin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But maybe, just maybe, Google will take that into consideration, and use the Google Video backend to power the YouTube website? YouTube is basically a name and color scheme, as far as most people are concerned.

    --
    A guilty conscience means at least you've got one.
  2. Aw. I really like Google vid's clean interface. by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I really liked Google vids clean layout, and served perfectly for putting up my (private/nonsearchable) testing videos for a game I am working on.

    A shame I have to resort to the cluttered YouTube interface, I hope they at least keep the 'private' option available.

    Don't get me wrong: I love YouTube when I want to randomly browse videos one after the other, getting appropriate links from the suggested videos: I just don't think it serves me well in publishing such a video (without resorting to implementing it in my site) with a clean interface.

  3. Re:Too bad by dedazo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The quality on YouTube varies wildly because of the sheer number of videos on there. Some are pretty good and some are really bad. Google Video on the other hand has far less content (and far less interesting content, AFAIC) and maybe on average the people who upload to it tend to have higher-quality original material.

    I rarely care about the quality on YouTube. After all, if I'm looking at an 80s commercial I haven't seen in 20+ years I don't expect HD quality. The obscure cool stuff is why I find YouTube compelling, not the "lonelygirl15"-like crap. YouTube is to video what Napster was to music in the early 00s. It's the most amazing collection of obscure crap you thought you had forgotten or really never thought you'd find. I really like it.

    --
    Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
  4. Quality Comparison by Hiroto.+S · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I like some of the feature of Youtube but I couldn't get the video quality I wanted from my iMovie created videos. Here is the report of my experiment I posted to Apple discussion forum (which sadly, nobody responded :-( )

    Export option for highest quality posting to Google video and YouTube

    They better do the switching after Youtube's quality is equivalent to GV. Also download feature is important for me too.

  5. Re:Too bad by tknd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I actually prefer youtube's interface to google's. With google's they took the 'search' engine approach to video, but how are you going to 'search' for video with text? I often find that you can't and that's why youtube's browsing capabilities won out over google.