Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
What the YouTube Player Redesign SHOULD Look Like [PIC]
injectiondesign.com — When I heard that YouTube was redesigning their player's look, I got really excited. I was hoping for some simpler, more professional controls that were light on the eyes and easier to use. Unfortunately, all they did was move around the graphics and add a dock. So, I opened up Photoshop and tried to make something better.
ventro- 4319 diggs
- digg it
- murty, on 10/11/2007, -89/+72Looks good, but the volume control doesn't really fit in with the rest of it.
- musicphreke, on 10/11/2007, -27/+47Agreed. It should be more rounded since the rest of the look of it has that feel to it with rounded corners, the round progress bar, etc.
- ventro, on 10/11/2007, -14/+244good call guys. I updated it with a "rounder" version.
- Berkana, on 10/11/2007, -17/+41The volume indicator's graphic should indicate a position along the line rather than a state of progress (such as playback); right now your volume control looks too much like the playback indicator, which indicates a state of progress rather than a setting.
- retral, on 10/11/2007, -2/+151I like how they recently made the fullscreen feature less retarded - it's really nice how it goes fullscreen and back to the small browser window without interrupting the video stream.
Anyways, I think it should be black.. light interface = intrusion on the video play. - maglob, on 10/11/2007, -16/+28Great, only complaint is the time/time setting, I just like to see the length aswell as the progress of the video
- maglob, on 10/11/2007, -12/+19^^^^
(I meant having them together, so bury me for that stupid omission) - hessian, on 10/11/2007, -2/+188I'd much prefer they work on the code behind the player rather than the aesthetics. Want to try jumping back 3 frames, sorry, you'll have to be content with 3 seconds instead; infuriating! There are far more advanced players on the web now there than YouTube's; considering they have the Google code whizzes working on it this is really disappointing.
- cpbrown, on 10/11/2007, -23/+4sorry for comment abuse (this *actually is* comment abuse :p ...
but here's a slight change to it ... http://cpbrown.googlepages.com/utube.htm
posted below but here'll probs get a bigger audience? - ceris, on 10/11/2007, -8/+175
is there some type of generic "Web 2.0 Redesign" program out there that doesn't really redesign anything but makes everything rounded? If so I call shenanigans and claim you used it. - EbilPhish, on 10/11/2007, -14/+6Is transparency over the video possible in flash? It would seem like it would be nicer to have simple alpha transparent overlay ed controls that appear when the mouse is on the window.
- cbuddha42, on 10/11/2007, -17/+8Sorry, but dragging the playback progress bar around to move backwards or fowards does not work very well in streaming content. This makes the rewind button a useful feature. As far as I can tell you removed this button without actually adding any functionality. That makes your redesign a downgrade.
- Murdats, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6"Anyways, I think it should be black.. light interface = intrusion on the video play."
I keep forgetting youtube is meant to be white, it looks so much better with the dark stylish style - MajorD, on 10/11/2007, -5/+22Why must the buttons on all of these players be microscopic? Give me some big dumb buttons so I'm not flailing for the inconvenient volume slider.
- Paroparo, on 10/11/2007, -14/+7Why are so many people digging some random graphical designers personal advertisement? He should be paying us (more) for this.
- qeek, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1It sucks anyway. Vide: Metacafe player.
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -16/+124Are you all fkn kidding me? This is the most unimaginative redesign I've EVER seen. It's arguably not even better than the old one...
- illuminatiwatch, on 10/11/2007, -19/+11this is retarded. there is no difference from my point of view. get a life
- Ireland, on 10/11/2007, -13/+5I just modded your design 'ventro': http://web.mac.com/brendanjnr/iWeb/Site/Fullscreen%20button...html
- TheCount, on 10/11/2007, -13/+8"Are you all fkn kidding me? This is the most unimaginative redesign I've EVER seen. It's arguably not even better than the old one..."
That's probably because you're a myspace user who has no sense of design to begin with. It may be difficult for you to understand that a redesign doesn't have to be wildly different from the original, in fact, most companies would prefer a redesign that remains true to the previous version so that current users aren't bewildered when they log on to find things changed.
If nothing else, the redesign is a simplification. It looks much less clunky. Maybe there isn't enough gradients and dancing gif's for you, maybe you'd prefer something like this? http://hometown.aol.com/Brooklynqueengrl/ - understudy, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13
Thank you!
I cannot understand why Google has such crappy, sub-par design in their products (Picasa excluded). To potential digg-downers, that doesn't mean I dislike your precious GMail and it's functionality—I'm simply speaking of formal design, not functional design.
Thanks for showing them how it could be done.
_ - slazer, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1true enough, MajorD. it sucks when controls are puny.
that'd be wicked if they made the control panel and elements zoom or get bigger on mouseover and revert on mouseout. and if it was done all stylish, like a quick inflate-deflate.
that's my 2%. - tonicboy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+69It was a pretty good effort, but I redesigned his redesign and added some improvements:
- put back the rewind button whichis useful
- made the time slider knob 3d so it was clear that it was a control you could click and drag
- made the full-screen and 1:1 res buttons larger and more clear
- made the volume know larger so it was easier to click
- put the current time next to the total time so your eye wouldn't have to jump back and forth to see both
Anyway, check it out and let me know what you think. http://www.agile-bits.com/utube_reredes.jpg - jonbon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8@tonicboy
funny, and highlights all the faults I saw right away.
@post
The design does nothing to improve the usability of the player at all. You could have least changed the color from that nasty primary red. - Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2looks great I esp. like that thermostat like bar it looks much better then the original
- jonbon, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5your portfolio is a classic manufactured plastic peice of un-inspired work.
Your whole site is a complete rip of Apple. You even use the same font (lucida grande) font-size, weights, and contrasts.
On your second design, I actually thought I was looking at the "it's Showtime" keynote preview. You use the same lighting effect on the background, in the same colors. Even the text is the same, and worse the buttons are almost identical.
Rifidi >> how many damn times do I have to see this color scheme....
Washing state constitutional law display..... it's the most stereotypical 'web 2.0' 'business style' 'georgia font' site, I feel like I've been there a 100 times already.
and then again in Artica.. you completely rip off Microsoft's site 'new age' look ( you two do have something in common, maybe you should apply).
This is what happens when these web2.0 tutorials get posted every second day on digg. - Atomic1fire, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3@illuminatiwatch
How could you not see the difference does someone need to show you
if so here
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/atomic1fire/newoldcommentary.jpg - lukas88, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5This is kind of dumb. The biggest difference seems to be the graphics in the position/volume slider. The graphics are not necessarily better, just different. The author should keep in mind, the position/time slider not only indicates what position it is in, but also how much of the video has download. For this reason, the actual position and the progress bar are distinct. As for the volume, I actually think youtube's version makes more sense but it is probably a matter of opinion. Everything else is the same even if it is in different locations, except the omission of the "Restart" button, which is probably too useful to omit.
Why did anyone digg this? Do you all really think rounded edges alone actually justifies changing something? - djlosch, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2i'm gonna go with the hordes of folk who think this is dumb. there's nothing new feature-wise in this design, and the graphics and style are substantially similar. therefore it's simply a matter of taste, and one man's champagne is another man's urine. i award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
- Ireland, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Check it out, I did a more subtle, cleaner, more user-friendly design: http://web.mac.com/brendanjnr/iWeb/Site/YouTube%20Player%20redesign.html
- BryanJK, on 10/11/2007, -4/+192Looks great, but at least its not like it used to be :P
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/7765/youtube1cq2.jpg- frostyausty, on 10/11/2007, -49/+5what the hell is this youtube thing brb im gonna watch TV
- maglob, on 10/11/2007, -1/+57Floods of bad memories returning, I thought it was a nightmare, but no, it really happened, youtube used to be that ugly!!!
- swazooe, on 10/11/2007, -20/+8are you kidding that looks much better than the POS it is now
- garreh, on 10/11/2007, -6/+51One thing I would like players to incorporate is a 'chapter selection' feature; http://i16.tinypic.com/66nk8l4.jpg
This feature is extremely useful to me. I can quickly see if the 200MB file is the one I want or not. - Sasquatch, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4@garreh
QI? Excellent choice - spoonism, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16@garreh
Doesn't YouTube have a 10 minute video limit, thus making a chapter feature pointless since long videos have to be split up anyway... - garreh, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2@sasquatch Thanks ;)
@spoonism That's true.. but I said 'playerS' - Google video could incorporate this, Stage6, etc - herrshuster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9you can still access that by replacing player2.swf in the url with player.swf
- FadieZ, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2@ spooner
AFAIK directors have unlimited vid length
- MrSunshine, on 10/11/2007, -8/+101I actually find the "back" button, which you didn't implement, quite helpful. As soon as the first seconds of the clip start streaming, I can click it and it loads the rest of the video while putting the slider back to the start. During that I can go back to the other website that I was reading in another tab, then once the video is loaded, I switch back to the Youtube clip and press start. So it's one click (click back button) instead of two (press pause & drag slider to the start of the clip).
- ventro, on 10/11/2007, -7/+88Interesting. That's the one button I have NEVER touched, because I always end up just dragging the slider to the beginning of the clip and hitting pause. I think it's taken out in the official design as well.
- GawtMilk, on 10/11/2007, -34/+6No, it's still there.
- senfo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+27Ok GawtMilk, then the rest of us must be blind.
- cell00, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7better would be if they had a "load without starting" button when you open it.
- Royal0rleans, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Or if firefox had the same feature that Safari has, ie. not playing a video that is in a different tab.
- Jabjabs, on 10/11/2007, -13/+3Not bad at all, rounded always equals good and I agree that the while the 'Back' function is useful I wouldn't miss it to much if they had it this way. ;)
- ifonly, on 10/11/2007, -6/+49I really like the progress bar, nice touch :)
- Krumm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11It is nice, but one of the new features is the ability to skip to a different section without loading the full clip.
This progress bar will look daft with only one 'open' side in the middle of the loaded section, or will nearly disappear with the amount of red that will be in there. - Hobophobik, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18Maybe by Web 3.0 we'll be back to square corners again?
- trioxylon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+37No no, we're going to move on to triangles. I can't wait.
- Krumm, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11It is nice, but one of the new features is the ability to skip to a different section without loading the full clip.
- Icebox, on 10/11/2007, -11/+14Very nice work - sleek and clean. I took a look at your portfolio too - you've got some great stuff on there, although it doesn't display properly in Opera on the Mac - the pictures in your portfolio are reeeeally small.
- beguiledfoil, on 10/11/2007, -10/+22Hey, Opera on a Mac! I thought I was the only one.... ::sniff::
I'll join you in gettin dugg down. We can be like comrades in arms: out numbered and off topic, but never afraid! - SuperFarStucker, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3It seems it doesn't display properly in opera, period. I also get the nanoscale thumbnails which seem to be mispositioned.
- rdoger6424, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@superfarstucker
Where is this UI bug? I'm going to see if it happens on the wii.
- beguiledfoil, on 10/11/2007, -10/+22Hey, Opera on a Mac! I thought I was the only one.... ::sniff::
- lesty420, on 10/11/2007, -11/+5They should make the YouTube player skinable i think we would see some nice designs
- dpower, on 10/11/2007, -2/+38Nice. It's as if the folks at YouTube don't have a graphic designer on staff, or if they do he/she has very little input.
- WorksCited, on 10/11/2007, -4/+193i like how 37 seconds is about halfway through a 6 minute clip
- neau, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2They can't seem to get them to work, eh?
- marnaq, on 10/11/2007, -1/+70Logarithmic scale?
- changyang1230, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20It's like watching a really bad video... after thirty seconds it felt like three minutes already.
- masterofNone, on 10/11/2007, -5/+59eh.
- BlvdKing, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Looks good!
- tracydanger, on 10/11/2007, -14/+33Just my opinion, I like the old one better. It could maybe use a redesign, but not that particular redesign.
- ApolloXLII, on 10/11/2007, -16/+10and why is this on digg? if Google wanted you to work for them, then they would have already found you. i dunno, kinda thought it looked like if their was a 1970's revival in the year 2050
- floatingpaint, on 10/11/2007, -12/+0maybe they should consider making it look like ipod interface...
like all the mp3 players companies do. - lothar250, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4You should be able to skip normally, not with like 1 minute steps...
Youtube sucks anyway... I prefer stage6.divx.com for the quality- MySchizoBuddy, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5its not about quality. its about the social network around youtube. favourites, custom channels. video replies etc etc. plus it doesn't require me to install Divx. we have enough online media players. I'll stick with flash.
- PixelVision, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11MySchizoBuddy.
You just pointed out one of the most annoying things about Youtube. The social networking is really annoying. People talking into their camera as if they have something worthwhile to say has seriously clogged up Youtube. The video replies are often something they could write in the comments.
In Firefox the DivX player installed in a few seconds for myself and it's far superior. Single click full screen, save video as an avi file, not to mention the stage6 website has much higher quality videos. I don't know what the aim of Youtube is, but it seems to be headed towards a MySpace for videos rather than a video archive website. Personally I want higher quality videos with a more advanced player and less ***** from the users who "vlog". - rhoul, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Um, you know there are other video clip sites out there, right? Google Video, Ebaumsworld, MetaCafe, Video Clips Dump, NothingToxic, StupidVideos, I Watch Funny Videos, BlinkX, Yahoo Video, MyVideo.de...
- bambala, on 10/11/2007, -9/+13the old design was better
- knedl, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1great job, love your work, cheers.
- diecastbeatdown, on 10/11/2007, -5/+50so you think that is a re-design?
- DCB360, on 04/11/2008, -2/+12Has anyone seen the Vimeo player?
That one looks nice. Too bad nobody uses that site.- davdav, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Vimeo player is excellent. Very minimal, and you only see the controls if you mouseover. I like it.
- BeyondGoodNEvil, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Now we're talking. I just look at all these video players that sites have, and they're so ***** pathetic compared to vimeo's. Auto-hidden controls are CLEARLY SUPERIOR to these waste-of-space fixed control players. I'd love for sites to look at vimeo's player as the basis (transparency, auto-hide, rectangle colored progress bar), and go from there. I don't like how vimeo offsets the controls from the bottom though.
My ideal player:
-Right side will be vertical, autohidden, transparent volume adjustment.
-Clicking anywhere on the screen will be both play/pause. No need for the actual ***** button, it should be the standard.
-Video time and total time can be displayed inside the rectangle progress bar, video time on left, total time on far right
-Rectangle progress bar will take up nearly entire bottom of screen
The ideal is easier clickability, which auto-hide enables by freeing up the entire screen for controls.
- goldliop, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20im really not seeing any practical redesigns in this model.
im thinking youtube may have got it right,
I like the idea of being able to chose which parts of the video i want to see, and jumping to related videos before the one im watching is done...
Im not trying to be mean or anything... but this design is just rounder.... - jackieokennedy, on 10/11/2007, -18/+86so
1) 2 elemnts that go together in people mind (current time / end time) are now separated ...
2) the "current point" is of the color of the loaded content, what happens if you're in the middle and all is charged?
3) he got rid of the little pixel bars that separated group of buttons and made the whole thing coherent
4) volume track is even smaller and seems to have lost the little graphical elements near the speaker icon
5) full screen buttons dont even look like buttons
BASICALLY > it's worst and full of flaws.
PEACE- smhill, on 10/11/2007, -2/+29Agreed. But that is the mindset of 'skinners' and wannabe designers. Design isn't about more bevels and drop shadows. It is about functionality and usability. While the suggested skin may appear a little prettier at first glance, it lacks intuitiveness and clarity. The sliders don't look like interface elements, the look like indicators. Nothing is broken up into intuitive groups, and as pointed out, the display buttons don't look like buttons. Basically it is a poor design.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. There is nothing wrong with the current one, it is simple and intuitive and attractive enough. - HigherLogic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yeah, this "design" fails the usability test big time. Plenty of bothersome features about it that were put there for the sake of "looking good" when it doesn't function. Sorry, try again!
- smhill, on 10/11/2007, -2/+29Agreed. But that is the mindset of 'skinners' and wannabe designers. Design isn't about more bevels and drop shadows. It is about functionality and usability. While the suggested skin may appear a little prettier at first glance, it lacks intuitiveness and clarity. The sliders don't look like interface elements, the look like indicators. Nothing is broken up into intuitive groups, and as pointed out, the display buttons don't look like buttons. Basically it is a poor design.
- hitkaiser, on 10/11/2007, -7/+27Prefer the old one...
- Ozeki, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5@ventro:
You have one CRAZY portfolio. Insane. O_O- insovietrussia, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5Yes, and your iPod Nano design is awesome.
- HUKI365, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4Your Nano = what the shuffle should have been updated to.
- drewxhawaii, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15if you have to label which is the old and which is the new, its not really worth it...
- lintmonkey, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4Your mom isn't really worth it.
- rocky1138, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Where's the repeat button? I can't believe no one's caught this yet.. Youtube is fantastic, but why can you not set videos to repeat when they're done?
- cpbrown, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1one aspect which needs a complete ovehaul is that stupid box below the video, even once you've added a video as a favourite it still has the text .. "add to favourites"
as for this new design, i'd give it 80%, not sure about the progress bar, should be finer in my opnion, i might post an interpretation as a reply to this comment (am i allowed to edit the one ventro sumbmitted? and i use the GIMP so please forgive :p)- cpbrown, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1http://cpbrown.googlepages.com/utube.htm
- insovietrussia, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Personally I would like to see something like the iTunes video interface, where semi-transparent controls only appear when the mouse is moved over.
- flag564, on 10/11/2007, -2/+91) The Back button needs to stay. It is an important feature with internet video to be able to start over quickly because the video didnt fully load or to avoid having to move the slider to the start which is awkward sometimes.
2) Pause should be activated by just clicking on the video. Other sites already do this. That way you can ditch that button
3) You should keep the total video time number. It is always good to know if that video you clicked on was either 1 minute or 11, and how much of that time has played.
4) The shrink video or full screen buttons don't communicate well on either.
5) The volume and video progress sliders work well on both. That's just a matter of style. - SAOSiN, on 10/11/2007, -0/+24I wouldn't call it a redesign...looks more like a face lift or something like that.
- myklee, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2More like a face drop...
- lachdizzle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I think the progress bar looks distracting with the big bright red bulge in the middle, but other than that it looks good.
- lemcoe9, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2That's awesome
- chronichyjinx, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Well Done!
- jaf893, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Never mind redesigning the player. What I would love to see is an option that would allow me to view videos without having to see a bunch of stupid comments below it. I'm sick of stupid arguments and ridiculous chain letters.
- drewskyjones, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I would like to see a player that doesn't require the internet, then...oh wait, that won't work...I'd better get back to my Netscape home page. Crap, I'm back at Digg.com...damn those hackers ;-)
/ducks
- drewskyjones, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I would like to see a player that doesn't require the internet, then...oh wait, that won't work...I'd better get back to my Netscape home page. Crap, I'm back at Digg.com...damn those hackers ;-)
- ooznu, on 10/11/2007, -5/+0We have an interesting project for you if you would like some work ;) Check your e-mail.
Regards,
Stefan - janeuner, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3I want to download a video file!
/hates flash - davidkeithjones, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13This is what makes the front page these days?
- matriculated, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12I think it's a undercover way to get people to his portfolio site.
- x911oz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1and a very stupid way at that.
- Adrianc333, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1The old one was 10x better.
- StoneDead, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I'd love to see the interface disappear when the mouse is not over it. E.g. first 10% of the movie the controls are there then after that they disappear until a user mouse overs.
- dbhalla, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6i dont like it, its too comicy
- hrvatski, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12how the hell is this digg worthy?
- weiss, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3totally wondering the same thing.. not to mention that the "redesign" was nothing revolutionary. no offense poster but your redesign was pretty weak. it has a lot less balance than the so called "old" design because the PAUSE button is so much heavier than the rest of your elements. :(
what i would like to see would have been a different interface altogether... not little mods of the current design... - drewskyjones, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That was my thought. I guess "the wisdom of crowds" kind of falls apart when everyone is drunk because it's a holiday.
- weiss, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3totally wondering the same thing.. not to mention that the "redesign" was nothing revolutionary. no offense poster but your redesign was pretty weak. it has a lot less balance than the so called "old" design because the PAUSE button is so much heavier than the rest of your elements. :(
- ahab2001, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23Sorry; this is pointless self-promotion and doesn't belong on Digg.
- Topher06, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Exactly, I can subtly change the design of YouTube too and post it on Digg. Anyways, perhaps YouTube should allow a skinnable interface, then at least this submission might have some merit ( like download my lame YouTube skin ).
- kevincannon, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Yea, but Topher, you'd probably do a crap job of it so it wouldn't get any diggs.
- blaneg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13so what. if you are going to redesign something then improve the functionality of it. Don't just round off the corners and ask for a paycheck.
- Visarga, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2FIRST - the player needs to be able do random skip (like Google video player)
SECOND - the player should be much larger (also like Google player)
THIRD - it should be oriented more like a TV with search function than a web page with a small embedded player (like the Apple Front Row and TiVo)- dooms13, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Just install the Google Video Player script for You Tube for Grease Monkey.
- grav3k33p3r, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Veoh.com player looks nice. Youtube should be inspired by Veoh's design.
- dooms13, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I completely agree. Veoh's player design is amazing. So smooth and simple to use.
- greystar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11This is weak. I don't mind a little self-promotion if you've got something worthwhile, but this is useless.
- tanner4105, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5The circle thing on the time bar thing looks like *****, just being honest.
- weizbox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Anything is better than what they have now. I could care less about the design, it just needs to friggin work. You can't even skip around in a video that well, or try to load unbuffered parts like you can with google's player. They really need some work FAST on that player... im surprised it has lasted like this for too long.
- srudes2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2What's with the red and grey?
If they really want to make something, make something like stage9.com - objectnull, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6What Youtube should REALLY look like.
http://stage6.divx.com/Diggnation/video/1223285/Diggnation-Episode-95 - tanner4105, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8http://img244.imageshack.us/my.php?image=newyoutubeforlifekv1.png
heres all they needed to do really
sorry for the *****, i used mspaint with the touchpad on my laptop - jtbandes, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Good God, your site is beautiful.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 144 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
