What is Digg?115 Comments
- pcgeek101, on 10/12/2007, -5/+72What's wrong with them? The ability to play video easily in a browser through Flash is great ... it beats an embedded Windows Media Player ActiveX object
- centinall, on 10/12/2007, -4/+45I'm sure I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but does the quality of the video/sounds really depend on the embedded player? Isn't it more to do with the compression and transcoding software on the server side?
- andrusk, on 10/12/2007, -16/+53Is it fair to say that they all suck equally?
- Woofcat, on 10/12/2007, -4/+28@NeoTechni
Because Linux hates Windows, and quicktime blows. Also Flash is way more platform independent. - krinthekuz, on 09/16/2008, -2/+20they do all suck equally. however it's funny that the initial image for msn's soapbox is really sharp, but as soon as you start the vid, it drops down to the same resolution as the rest of the vids.
- L0t3k, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19I have to say, most all of them look nicer than YouTube, have less obnoxious controls, and some don't have those awful draw-away items when the video is over. Those are big factors for me.
- GuyHitByTruck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17@centinall
I also have no idea what I'm talking about, but I believe you're right. All of those players are flash players, so it's all the same thing basically. What matters is the compression and encoding used on the back end by the services used to stream the video (youtube, google, etc.). - Ninjab3ar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Doesn't that really depend on server quality?
In my opinion i like Google video, their player allows you to click on parts of the video that haven't loaded yet and buffers from that point on, and unlike you tube, you don't need to rebuffer a new video if you decide to go full screen. - NeoTechni, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I dunno, soapbox loaded fastest for me
- Ahnteis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10"I'm sure I probably don't know what I'm talking about, but does the quality of the video/sounds really depend on the embedded player? Isn't it more to do with the compression and transcoding software on the server side?"
Yes, but that's what they are measuring. The title, etc may have been misleading, but the page is still an interesting comparison of the different video services. - Ninjab3ar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11The ultimate combination would be Youtube service, with the Google video player. Its possible, too, because Google bought Youtube. I don't know why its not implemented, though.
- ministewy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12"Because full-screen isnt worth 30 bucks"
some people actually paid the $30??....
yikes - Anand999, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Because 1.) Quicktime, on Windows at least, is a turd and 2.) it's not even available for Linux.
- xenonflash, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Yeah, Google Video is my favorite player. Revver is nice too. Youtube is ok...
- vuzman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Where's the DivX Web Player in this comparison? It has by far the best quality I've ever seen.
http://stage6.divx.com/ - colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Err.. quicktime doesn't allow fullscreen unless you pay for the pro version."
iTunes, which is pretty much how Quicktime is distributed these days anyway, will do Full Screen video without Pro. - OmegaNine, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I like DailyMotion
- Ninjab3ar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Plus Google allows you to download as iPod format, a big plus. Too bad they have the crappiest video service, the Google video player had so much potential.
P.S. I made another reply because i For some reason wans allowed to edit my last post. - Dustyb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Soapbox loaded fastest for me too, and it seems to be the best quality. But you can't beat the non-intrusive gui of daily motion's player.
- stuartjmoore, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8This is online, embedded, fast video. qt and wm suck for that. If you want to download HD content, go for qt or wm, but for lots of applications flv is the best.
Actually, the best option is to have flv to view online, and avi to download and watch on a real TV. - Daiken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think without a doubt, the best player out there is stage6. It's super high quality. Only issue is it's a bit slow to buffer large files. You can even embed, but it's a bit tougher to do with it, but it can be done using the following link.
http://labs.divx.com/WebPlayerCodeGenerator - logicalnoise, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4out of them all metacafe is the only one I have problems with. No matter what vid it always stutters when it plays. I'm running firefox 2.0 with the latest flash version and I'm still having trouble with their crap site.
- Broelke4, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Google and Revver FTW.
Youtube is ok because of it's proliferation of most of the internet; it's not a big surprise when it comes up. - Ahnteis, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Err.. quicktime doesn't allow fullscreen unless you pay for the pro version.
- Jammerdelray, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I like Soapbox the best....Started playing faster than most and shows information on the video in the nav bar.
- Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Nobody said which one looks the best! I like to use Vimeo and blip, but Youtube is not bad to use. If YouTube i.e. Google could take a page out of blip's book, they could redesign a less gaudy (albeit utilitarian) player.
- Linh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2stage6 requires the user to download yet another plugin. Just about everyone already has flash installed.
w/ that said, quality is definitely awesome. - alexpigment, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3STAGE6 (divx's official page). hands down.
- slsanity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ vuzman
Required download... :( - tikistyle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Check out some of the technology behind all this. http://www.on2.com
- whiskeysquared, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6People are constantly griping about flash video all the time, but I really don't understand why. It's fast to load, plays well and does what I want. Can't say the same for windows media player embedded vids. And quicktime, while it is nice looking video, takes a while to load. Is there really a huge demand to watch all of those quick clips full screen?
- adragons, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I agree, which is why we should all try to use divx :S It is by far the fastest loading one i've seen. (Good for you if you've seen faster)
- andrew.bell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You can customize the layout of the Google videos. http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2006/11/customize-embedded-google-video-player.html
- DevlinD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Meh they are all pretty much the same, in the battle for online video supremacy there are two main things that matter.
1. How fast does it load?
2. What else can I watch?
Videos that have good algorithms for suggesting alternative content keep the users on the site longer and therefore have a better chance of attracting and raking in more advertising money. YouTube's is the best in my opinion (they also have the best content to offer suggestions from mind you) but they never do it for their streaming videos. Once they integrate advertising into these streams Im sure they will though, it only makes sense. They also load quickly along with Google, Soapbox was also fairly fast. - fash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1check out http://flowplayer.sourceforge.net/
FOSS and ad-free - PsychTouch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1mmh there was something familiar in that landscape ... then i figured out it's a couple of km far from my house ^_^
- lukejames, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the subtleties are... subtle. so i can't say so much which has the best quality so much as i can say which have the worst -- so i won't bother. but i will note that google allows you to download as mp4, and that trumps all of the others by a huge margin.
- Namain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Firefox has many extensions for the same purpose. Ook? Video Ook! and Video Downloader are just 2 of them. Plus these are able to download from most other web based players to boot.
but here is the google video bookmark Scatropolis was talking about:
javascript:if(document.getElementById('macdownloadlink')!=null){window.location.href=document.getElementById('macdownloadlink')}else{alert('Go to Google Video to download videos as AVI.')}; - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1it's obvious many sacrifice some quality for less bandwidth and cpu usage.
- Doomhammer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What I wonder is why don't any sites just let me download the damned movie ?! I hate *all* embedded video players. ActiveX objects and the such don't work under Linux, and don't even work *well* under Windows. Flash would be alright, except for the complete lack of full-screen-ability, and also the fact that they haven't released a new version for Linux in a VERY long time (isn't the latest stable Linux Flash player still 7 ?!)
However, if they would just let me download the damned thing, then I could play it in whatever player I want, when I want, etc. - rasman1978, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you use Wordpress, nothing's easier than this Revver plugin.
http://digg.com/software/Revver_Wordpress_Plugin - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the embedded windows media player needs 'windows'.
- tarkam, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You can watch quicktime files in fullscreen without shelling out the $30, just import into itunes (which most people have since its bundled with quicktime) and from there you can easily watch quicktime filles in fullcreen mode for free.
- seaotter02, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Revver allows you to download in Quicktime mp4 as well, without the need for a special player. They also pay you for sharing that file (20%) and pay the creator (50% of remainder), so you can use them in podcasts or on p2p networks and still earn money for your work or for sharing others' work.
- TiE23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1In general it seems like Google is the best all around, with Revver having the best video and sound. YouTube seems to take the cake with having the worst quality.
- distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Revver looks the best to me, pretty clearly.
- Linh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like rever only because I found out they actually pay you. Cool aspect. Otherwise, probably would stick to youtube just for the fact they have a huge community... for now.
- barcode, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I commend YouTube for this, it means that it works on my Linux machine, the Flash 9 Player for Linux still has many issues.
- AlanKc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I would be interested to know how many of these video sites there are.. It seems every week I hear about a new one..
- andrew.bell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is there anyway to have a dynamic embedded Google Video? I want to embed my latest video. Also, can you put a link on an embedded google video?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 115 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is