Archive for March 17th, 2008

Flickr video finally?


I normally try not to buy into the rumour mill, but this is a story that just won’t go away. Furthermore, I’m really hoping it proves to be true.

As is being reported by a number of different online tech publications, most notably CNet News.com and TechCrunch, Flickr is allegedly slated to enable video sharing sometime in April.

Via TechCrunch:

“…rumors are flying that Yahoo intends to integrate video into Flickr very soon, perhaps in the next three weeks. Part of the delay may have been a long internal debate about how to make Flickr Video special and distinct from what YouTube already offers. They apparently have come to some product decisions, and will be making an announcement soon.”

It’s not surprising that YouTube is immediately brought into the discussion. With YouTube and online video virtually synonymous these days, how could you not mention them honestly. Yet while there is a fair amount of overlap in the user-bases of both applications, I see some distinct differences that are worth bearing in mind.

For example, depending on how Flickr envisages and implements their video service, support for video downloads could be extremely significant. This is why I’ve always favoured Google Video over YouTube. Google Video offers the option to download Video iPod/Sony PSP instances, whereas no such functionality exists on YouTube. There are of course a whole slew of applications that facilitate this activity - legal or otherwise - but the fact remains there is no native functionality in YouTube.

Whether this is meant to force users to continue to return to the site to imbibe their daily dose of advertisements, curb the spread of illegally uploaded material, or perhaps some other reason is unclear. Regardless, the absence of a download option has always been a huge strike against YouTube for me. I also don’t see how this is a developmental oversight.

Comparing video delivery and photo delivery is like comparing apples and oranges of course, but the fact remains that Flickr makes downloading content very easy. You give the users a suite of different access and download options and let them decide. I see no reason why this should be any different with video.

More significant that that though are the fundamental differences in community mentality that surrounds each application. This is more of a tangential consideration from an application perspective, and yet it’s still quite relevant for users trying to decide which service to use. To me YouTube is geared towards content you want to share with masses of people; Flickr is for more personal content.

YouTube is an arena rock concert, much like Woodstock; Flickr is an intimate acoustic show in a coffee house. The user mentalities are vastly different between the two services.

This more than anything is what Flickr needs to focus on when considering their video service. With Flickr you can still discern a sense of self amongst the user base which could yield some really valuable interaction. With YouTube you see a crowd mentality that can propel a video to millions of hits in a matter of months, but that can also produce some pretty nasty characters.

I don’t upload family material to YouTube for this reason - at least not publicly. With Flickr Video, I’d be more inclined.

References:

Monday, March 17th, 2008

digital media 2 Comments