Dubstepforum.com

It look shit.

firky wrote:It look shit.

Very shit.

Yeah not too nice looking. Honestly we're lucky youtube is still even in existence so I won't bitch. They currently lose around half a billion dollars a year. New design looks more bandwidth friendly.

Youtube is essentially a data-mine that collates information from users, much the way google does. It's only four or five years old too so eventually it may become profitable. Either way their new design looks gash.

Yeah looks fucking horrid.

I never knew they lose money?!?! Surely with a billion hits a day or whatever ridiculous amount it is they are making silly money from advertising?

I mean UK national newspapers have less than a few million print run and their rates are mental. How could they possibly lose moneh.

firky wrote:Youtube is essentially a data-mine that collates information from users, much the way google does. It's only four or five years old too so eventually it may become profitable. Either way their new design looks gash.

Yeah apparently they are in talks with several large movie/tv studios like Viacom I think, so that may help make profits down the line. The bandwidth costs are ridiculous though, and I don't think even Google can keep up for long. When you get past the surface, it really is one of the best resources in the world IMO, there's so much information on it. I wouldn't mind paying for some kind of "premium service" if it was a reasonable price.

Some interesting info:
http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2010 ... rself.html (VERY interesting post on Youtube's official blog concerning it's fate)
http://youtube-global.blogspot.com more posts, and a some info on the new youtube layout/features
http://www.davemadethat.com/2009/04/17/ ... utube-die/

Youtube blog front page wrote:It’s great news that there are 24 hours of video uploaded to YouTube every minute, we support 1080p and HD uploads are rising quickly, but that’s also meant increasing bandwidth costs cutting into our bottom line. And so, in our drive to keep expenses under control, we’ve decided that April 1 is the perfect day to take the important step of offering a new way to experience YouTube: text-only mode, or TEXTp

wormcode wrote:I wouldn't mind paying for some kind of "premium service" if it was a reasonable price.

Just turn comments off

DRTY wrote:

wormcode wrote:I wouldn't mind paying for some kind of "premium service" if it was a reasonable price.

Just turn comments off

Haha sometimes the comments are better than the actual video! I always get a laugh out of the stupid arguments on there.

You'll all be little bitches about it now but down the line you'll eventually like it.

domhunt wrote:You'll all be little bitches about it now but down the line you'll eventually like it.

Na, it's horrible. All the info that was previously there is now hidden away, it's not practical.

I'd for youtube premium service if: 1) it didn't have adverts. 2) there was an idiot filter on it 3) no censorship

I swear this is the second update they've done.

maybe it's just an april fool...because they're based out of Cali so it's not noon yet.

lol I don't know to be honest.

I'm just waiting for the other video services to get to youtube's level (if ever).

Vimeo is like the BBC Radio 4 of streaming websites and youtube is the Channel 5.

DRTY wrote:I mean UK national newspapers have less than a few million print run and their rates are mental. How could they possibly lose moneh.

newspapers stopped a long time ago being a truly profitable biz in the traditional sense, like surviving from the ads and shit, usually they are kept alive as a mean of social and political influence, otherwise with the same investment you can get much higher profit rates in other biz. i guess [as in not know for sure, just extrapolating the little data i have] 75% don't make more profit than just what real businessmen would call "change", if any, especially now when ad market is down due to "crisis"

drokkr wrote:

firky wrote:It look shit.

Very shit.

Very very shit. ¬¬

Neurotik wrote:

drokkr wrote:

firky wrote:It look shit.

Very shit.

Very very shit. ¬¬

Very very very shit. It looks too unorganised now

Are you guys serious! I love it!
It feels more round.
I don't get why people have to complain every time a site changes the layout.

WhosZena? wrote:Are you guys serious! I love it!
It feels more round.
I don't get why people have to complain every time a site changes the layout.

I don't love it, but it's not that horrible.

WhosZena? wrote:Are you guys serious! I love it!
It feels more round.
I don't get why people have to complain every time a site changes the layout.

I especially hate how the youtube logo looks like it hasn't loaded properly.

Just noticed, it looks like an april fools, check out the logo URL below...

http://s.ytimg.com/yt/img/logo_april_fo ... 157034.png

i nerver use it so i dont give a fart