"Those lucky bastards..."Luck had nothing to do with it. They had an idea, implemented it, and saw it through to the end with good 'ole fashioned work.Ideas are a dime a dozen, those who put up the effort to carry them through successfully are rare.
Google have a more reputable profile than Yahoo, though. Perhaps they'll brand it "YouTube from Google" with the Google bit in smaller letters. Perhaps you're right, and they'll just keep it as YouTube. Either way, I don't see them dropping the YouTube *name*.That wasn't the main point though; put simply, there's no reason for Google to continue running two different video systems. Even if they intend retaining separate YouTube and Google (Video) brands, my guess is that (A) they'll both use the same underlying system and (B) they'll both use the same merged archive of video material (albeit possibly restricting the material available via a specific service for marketing or legal reasons).Which system will they settle on? I don't know. If converting the archive was an issue, I would guess they'd standardise on YouTube's system; but in all honesty, I'm not convinced that that would be a big deal.
Personally, I work for a company that researches and manufactures medical/dental devices. Awhile back we were purchased for $40million or so. How do these sites create $billions indexing OUR content, or delivering OUR videos.... We should have read the terms before we uploaded a video that helped make them $100'smillions........
drathanOct 10, 2006
They'll definitely keep the users. In fact, here's my prediction for what will happen:<a class="user" href="http://digg.com/tech_news/So_Google_bought_YouTube_Here_s_what_happens_in_the_next_six_months/">http://digg.com/tech_news/So_Google_bought_YouTube_Here_s_what_happens_in_the_next_six_months/</a>
rderveloyOct 10, 2006
"Those lucky bastards..."Luck had nothing to do with it. They had an idea, implemented it, and saw it through to the end with good 'ole fashioned work.Ideas are a dime a dozen, those who put up the effort to carry them through successfully are rare.
toxicredmOct 10, 2006
"We're going to invest this money back into our community...psych!"
nogoodnamesleftOct 10, 2006
Google have a more reputable profile than Yahoo, though. Perhaps they'll brand it "YouTube from Google" with the Google bit in smaller letters. Perhaps you're right, and they'll just keep it as YouTube. Either way, I don't see them dropping the YouTube *name*.That wasn't the main point though; put simply, there's no reason for Google to continue running two different video systems. Even if they intend retaining separate YouTube and Google (Video) brands, my guess is that (A) they'll both use the same underlying system and (B) they'll both use the same merged archive of video material (albeit possibly restricting the material available via a specific service for marketing or legal reasons).Which system will they settle on? I don't know. If converting the archive was an issue, I would guess they'd standardise on YouTube's system; but in all honesty, I'm not convinced that that would be a big deal.
Closed AccountOct 10, 2006
the ambiguously rich duo
sparks123Oct 10, 2006
Congrats Youtube!!
kiantechOct 10, 2006
why you guys bitching, if I was offered 1.6billion I would take it too.
wraithemailOct 10, 2006
Personally, I work for a company that researches and manufactures medical/dental devices. Awhile back we were purchased for $40million or so. How do these sites create $billions indexing OUR content, or delivering OUR videos.... We should have read the terms before we uploaded a video that helped make them $100'smillions........
Closed AccountOct 11, 2006
No i didnt fail miserably because I was being sarcastic and retarded, lighten up a bit, my purpose was to be funny not to be politically correct/
unversedOct 15, 2006
He's "a American"