Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Microsoft's Video Site 'Soapbox' Disappointing 121

nieske writes "CNet reviews Microsoft's new video site, Soapbox. Though browsing and uploading is easy, CNet isn't very enthusiastic about the beta, mostly blaming this on the fact that Soapbox has nothing more to offer than other video sites. From the article: 'It's a slightly better sharing service than YouTube in some small technical ways, but it doesn't help users make money from their content like Revver does; it doesn't have granular privacy controls like Vox; it won't post directly into blogs for you like VideoEgg; and it won't show videos from other networks like Yahoo Video. Given Microsoft's position in the video sharing market (dead last), I expected a more aggressive product.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft's Video Site 'Soapbox' Disappointing

Comments Filter:
  • by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <eldavojohnNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @08:46AM (#16137036) Journal
    Given Microsoft's position in the video sharing market (dead last), I expected a more aggressive product.
    Well, this is Microsoft you are critiquing. I mean, what have they traditionally aimed for? Functionality? Cross product compliance? Not really ... In fact, from what I've read and seen, Soapbox looks like some classic Microsoft action. They aim for ease of use (easy uploading and browsing) and visual "bells & whistles" while using traditional tactics to stifle/strong arm the competition.

    This is very similar to their traditional software market that they have come to dominate.

    This reviewer is the minority of computer users. He is a technically elite individual. There are more regular average people than there are technically elite. Microsoft is probably aiming for the market of older people who shoot home videos on their digital camera and want a site they can understand -- to hell with unneeded functionality. I think there is a large market of people out there and I think that Microsoft is attempting to enter the online video market through this demographic.

    I added a 120MB digital camera video to Google Video last week and the process was way too complex for my mom. Yet, I'm sure that she and my sisters will want to share their home videos with the rest of the family for free. And they're not looking to link it to their blogs (they don't know what that word means) or turn a buck on ad revenue. Playing to the lowest common denominator will get you very far in America.

    Just something to think about before you laugh at Microsoft and claim they'll always be dead last.

    Since the review so heavily criticized Soapbox, what did the reviewer think Microsoft should have added to put it ahead of the competition? I mean, if you add the same functionality (say, ad revenue), you're not exactly putting yourself ahead and you're just doing what's been done. Is there anything left to be done to make your online video site "the best"?
    • traditional tactics to stifle/strong arm the competition.

      Curious - where does the above fit in here? As for playing to the lowest common denominator, I thought that was supposed to be Apple's shtick?

      • Curious - where does the above fit in here?

        The fact that you can't watch Yahoo Videos through Soapbox (as the summary mentioned).

        Plus, you really don't know what's going on in the background. I mean, usually that tactic is what follows the release of the software. I'm guessing Microsoft has someone in mind to provide ads, storage, etc. The fact that it's not something you can incorporate into blog sites is also a little evidence they won't play ball with anyone.

        As for playing to the lowest co

        • This LCD-ness is what Linux lacks (Ubuntu's getting close), right now it seems (again, in my opinion) that the sheer lack of open drivers for devices and PCI cards make this damn near impossible.

          There's a lot of drivers in Linux. I've installed Linux on a bunch of different computers, and pretty much the only things that aren't autodetected have been wireless. Now, I don't use things like webcams or dial-up modems, and I'm not saying Linux is perfect, but for a lot of your basic hardware Linux is already

        • Yea, you can't watch their competitors videos, therefore Microsoft is "strong arming" people.

          The constant "gee whiz, micro$oft is $o evil and they $uck so bad. I use teh Linux." Microsoft bashing. Don't you ever get tired of the endless complaining about a company that, on balance, isn't any worse then a lot of other companies?

          Microsoft is the largest software maker in the world. Get over it. Linux will never overtake Windows on the desktop. Get over it.

          What does this (BETA) video site lack that Google's vi
          • Zuh? (Score:1, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward

            The constant "gee whiz, micro$oft is $o evil and they $uck so bad. I use teh Linux." Microsoft bashing. Don't you ever get tired of the endless complaining about a company that, on balance, isn't any worse then a lot of other companies?

            When did I bash Microsoft? I pointed out that they're filling a market area that needs to be filled and I pretty much applauded them for it. Seriously, I don't have much against them and more power to them if they know how to work the capitalist system.

            eldavojohn

      • Well I will bite the troll.
        I thought that was supposed to be Apple's shtick?

        You are confusing user friendly with Idiot Proof. Just because it is easy doesn't mean that it has to be dumbed down.
        For Example take CD Burning (Pre XP)

        For Linux You needed to create a directory with the files you wanted to burn. Make a ISO image of that directory. then you can burn that ISO.

        For Windows 2000 and below. You needed a third party tool which may or may not lockup your computer every 5 minutes. Most of the time the too
        • Way to FUD there, jellomizer. Mac OS X 10.1 Puma was released in September 2001. Linux users have had K3b for optical disc burning since late 1999, removing the need to make an iso first long before your comparison timeframe. Nice try though.
          • And where was this utility default installed onto what distribution. And if it was k3b doesn't seem like a good name to help me figure out to burn a CD. When using Linux I find an app called cdrecord or cdwrite that make far more sience then k3b and apps like mkiso so one would follow the more logical connection then trying k3b when looking for a cd burining app.

            If Linux wanted to be really fancy, and user fiendly in the Linux mind set you mount the blank CD copy files to the mount point and unmounting the
            • If Linux wanted to be really fancy, and user fiendly in the Linux mind set you mount the blank CD copy files to the mount point and unmounting the drive will burn the CD.

              I'm sure you meant user friendly, but that's beside the point. You actually have a pretty good idea there...but it would only be friendly to users who are already comfortable with the way Linux works. Saying the words 'mount' or 'unmount' to a Windows user gets you nothing but a blank stare, and maybe a childish giggle. (heheh, heheheh,

        • by Anonymous Coward
          "For Linux You needed to create a directory with the files you wanted to burn. Make a ISO image of that directory. then you can burn that ISO."

          That's one way but not the only way. You can drag-n-drop your files or select. Click burn ISO in K3B. In OSX you can even type, heaven forbid, in a shell:
          $ hdiutil burn [some_image.iso]
          • I never ment to say it was the only way but it is the most subscribed method.
            As I stated befor Linux apps come up with STUPID NAMES like K3B Oh will do a man k3b to see if it will burn my CD. No Ill probably just view my /usr/bin directory and ohh I see a program call cdrecord what will I use.
            k3b or cdrecord. what would I do a man on k3b or cdrecord, whill I want to record a cd I think I will use cdrecord.
    • by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @09:06AM (#16137130)
      Well, this is Microsoft you are critiquing. I mean, what have they traditionally aimed for? Functionality? Cross product compliance?

      Mediocrity? Not that that is always a bad thing, they do after all own the desktop and a significant portion of the server market, and they got there partly by never scaring their (corporate) customers by taking big design and tecnology risks. They always play it as safe as possible which is why their attempts to do radical innovative things usually end up looking a bit..... um..... unimpressive.
    • Is there anything left to be done to make your online video site "the best"?

      I am patiently waiting for the next innovation. If the reviewer or we had the answer then it would getting rolled into a new site as we speak. Innovation takes time, a PVR is just a VCR without a tape but Tivo made it better.
    • Never mind all that. They have a video of Steve Balmer dresses as a butterfly. Instant win.
    • However, if people want real ease of use, for sharing family photos and videos, then I would highly recommend DropShots [dropshots.com]. Although it doesn't have tons of features, its extremely simple. Just click on the icon in the system tray, then drop the files into the window that displays. I have my own hosting service, with Gallery2, and lots of space, but its was impossible to make an argument against using dropshots for my wife. It was just too easy, and too straight forward. No site I've ever seen has taken
    • Considering that I've never heard of Revver, Vox or VideoEgg and didn't know that Yahoo! had released their own video site, I wouldn't say that the first three mentioned are the competition. YouTube and Google would be the ones they would have to match and beat, and the reviewer says that Microsoft's offering is already slightly better than YouTube. Comic Book Guy shouldn't review sites.
    • Microsoft is probably aiming for the market of older people who shoot home videos on their digital camera and want a site they can understand -- to hell with unneeded functionality. I think there is a large market of people out there and I think that Microsoft is attempting to enter the online video market through this demographic.

      I think this demographic is actually just getting smaller, as the people without computers in their childhood slowly leave the market... Sure many are still there now, but is i

    • Since the review so heavily criticized Soapbox, what did the reviewer think Microsoft should have added to put it ahead of the competition? I mean, if you add the same functionality (say, ad revenue), you're not exactly putting yourself ahead and you're just doing what's been done. Is there anything left to be done to make your online video site "the best"?

      If this guy had had some good ideas on what a sight should have had to make it successful, he'd have found venture capital and implemented it himself.

      Tho

    • Since the review so heavily criticized Soapbox, what did the reviewer think Microsoft should have added to put it ahead of the competition?


      How about releasing something first instead of following what everyone else is doing? All this company does now is follow "Web 2.0" companies in the online market and Apple in the desktop and digital media markets.
    • Quite frankly, I'm surprised that C|Net didn't review it more highly. They gush all over everything else Microsoft does - and when Apple stumbles, it's front page news, but you can read an article today about Vista that doesn't even mention the fact that it's two years late and dozens of features short.

      C|Net has very little credibility with me.
  • Would be the acting Chair-Man sending chairs flying.... while sliding down a piece of soap that's fallen out of the box.

    The Batman / Butterfly theme is neither here nor there...
  • by v1ncent ( 997828 )
    This is no suprise from Microsoft. Copy the basics to test the waters... then throw money behind the project to dominate.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by 91degrees ( 207121 )
      But I can't see where this strategy has been hugely successful. Possibly with the XBox, but they haven't dominated in any area online, nor do they seem likely to. As a company, they have the agility to put something like this up quickly and easily, but lack something that would allow them to take risks and try something new.
      • by Yahweh Doesn't Exist ( 906833 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @09:23AM (#16137229)
        >But I can't see where this strategy has been hugely successful. Possibly with the XBox

        if a 4+ billion dollar loss, tying for 2nd place in marketshare, and hoping to see a profit in the 10th year of running counts as a "huge success", then I don't know what would count as a failure? overheating power bricks actually killing users?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by 91degrees ( 207121 )
          It's not a loss. It's an investment. It's a 4 billion dollar avertisement for the XBox360. The Xbox has become a dominant player in the console market from nothing.
          • "Dominant" implies top dog status. While the Xbox pushed Microsoft from nothing to a key player in the console market, it's hardly dominant when it was second or third in terms of market share (depending on who you talked to).
            • Indeed. But I didn't say they dominated. I said they were "A dominant player". MS, Sony and Nintendo dominate the market. Not one of these does so individually.
        • if a 4+ billion dollar loss, tying for 2nd place in marketshare, and hoping to see a profit in the 10th year of running counts as a "huge success", then I don't know what would count as a failure? overheating power bricks actually killing users?

          Microsoft is a debt-free company with $36-$40 billion in liguid reserves. Microsoft doesn't have to deliver results in the next quarter.

          Unlike Nintendo Microsoft is broadly represented in the consumer market. It can leverage products and services to another's advan

        • by phorm ( 591458 )
          For entering a pre-existing market with well known and defined competitors, yeah it's not all that bad actually when you get second place. It's like a rich preppy kid who decided to sink his cash in on a personal gym and then managed to get second in a weight-lifting competition.
  • by necro81 ( 917438 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @08:53AM (#16137072) Journal
    Until it can automatically subtitle in seven different languages, help you create Matrix-like effects, split the atom, and turn my crap home movies into Oscar contenders, I won't be satisfied.
    • by kjart ( 941720 )

      Until it can automatically subtitle in seven different languages, help you create Matrix-like effects, split the atom, and turn my crap home movies into Oscar contenders, I won't be satisfied.

      I was a little surprised by the review myself. The first part of the article (talking about the specifics) seemed fairly positive, but the end result was pretty negative. The author doesn't seem to think that making something that was (relatively) difficult fairly easy is any kind of unique selling point. That's prec

    • Whoever modded this Flamebait obviously doesn't have a sense of humor.
    • >Until it can automatically subtitle in seven different languages, help you create Matrix->like effects, split the atom, and turn my crap home movies into Oscar contenders, I won't be >satisfied.

      and I would have been satisfied if they allowed hard core porn to be uploaded.
  • Get in there with a product that *just about* does what it says on the tin, then use your squillions of $$$ to stifle the competition.
    • by MBC1977 ( 978793 )
      hmmm... perhaps, but if this was another company, we would call it being smart. Seriously, in a battle (Business being a constant war), one does not automatically field their best man (or woman), unless they are damm sure they are going win, without challenge or casulty. If you have an any doubts, then you test the waters, first.

      Granted MS's cash and IP warchest allow to make such a move, but it took them time to get there. I remember Windows 1.0 and up to 3.0 it sucked. Same with IE until 5.0

      Nobody
  • by Alcimedes ( 398213 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @09:01AM (#16137110)
    Since Apple hasn't come out with a video sharing service yet, MS doesn't have a template for what theirs will look like.
    • When I went to the site it said "Loading". Waited a while, and nothing happened. I clicked on the "fullscreen" button and a up came video of some gay-looking guy in a gay-looking MSN butterfly costume. I almost puked when I saw that, and took a quick close window shorcut, but no! It popped up a JavaScript dialog asking if I'm sure. Hell, yes I am! The only thing missing is Clippy or that braindead dog that Microsoft ships XP with. Ugh. I'm going to blacklist this site. It was truly tasteless...

      • I'm glad I wasn't alone in the almost vomited catagory. I'm sad that I wasn't strong enough to close out of it. It was so horrible I couldn't look away. Perhaps that grotesque dance is their aggressive marketing strategem...
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @09:02AM (#16137115)
    Currently MS is "embracing". I.e. copying what the competition has.

    Extending comes later when they got the leverage to set the "standard".
    • by Ilgaz ( 86384 )
      Copying down to Flash based (on2 VP 6 codec in fact) video! I really hope they had to pay millions for that thing. Their stupid hate to other Operating Systems of choice finally cost them something.

      Their idea was "lets support windows media on windows systems running IE only, let those nerds (linux) and Maccies pay for not choosing our OS" for all these years.

      Now: They have to use Adobe Flash while having million/billion dollar spent Windows Media in hand.

      Good riddance!

      Also they want MS "Live" sign in (good
      • by kjart ( 941720 )

        Their idea was "lets support windows media on windows systems running IE only, let those nerds (linux) and Maccies pay for not choosing our OS" for all these years.

        Now: They have to use Adobe Flash while having million/billion dollar spent Windows Media in hand.

        Good riddance!

        I'm sorry, but what is that supposed to mean? You can use this (allegedly) in IE and Firefox = good riddance? I'm confused.

        • by Ilgaz ( 86384 )
          As there is no windows media (official) option for other operating systems and even on win32 wmedia has problems with browsers other than IE, they had to buy Flash solution to support them while having windows media technology in hand.

          The famous incompatibilities of windows media finally costs them something.

          Thanks to them and Real networks policies before Helix project, embedded video standard is Flash now.
  • And we are surprised that a tacit technology re-seller that constantly tries to re-market other peoples concepts and products does a poor job of re-packaging a concept when it's caught behind the curve and has to scramble to get it's competing offering out before people notice that yet again they missed the boat.
  • news flash! vista will now have intergrated video sharing as a core part of the OS. that will fix their market position
  • Betcha it's going to add some menu item like "upload to soapbox" or some other system integration. Then it will begin to eat up market share for the "easy to use" crowd.
  • by Reality Master 201 ( 578873 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @09:07AM (#16137138) Journal
    I'd be rather pissed off at the current management of the company.
    Microsoft has traditionally been able to compete in a given market by
    sheer size. The XBox is a good example - they sucked it initially,
    then basically poured money and effort into it till they became a dominant
    player in the market.

    But now they're trying to become dominant in everything - search, portable music players/services, online video streaming, etc. Microsoft can certainly dominate
    one market with brute force, perhaps two or three. But at some point, the brute
    force method just isn't possible anymore - it eats far too many resources. And
    from the looks of it, MS doesn't seem to be getting any better at initial execution.
    As late to the game as they were with online video and search engines, they needed
    to have a "wow" product. Instead, they turned out their typical "meh" product.
    Eventually, they won't be able to spend their way out of the holes they dig.
    • The XBox is a good example - they sucked it initially, then basically poured money and effort into it till they became a dominant player in the market.
      I wouldn't call tied for distant second in a three player market a "dominant player".
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by asuffield ( 111848 )

        The XBox is a good example - they sucked it initially, then basically poured money and effort into it till they became a dominant player in the market.

        I wouldn't call tied for distant second in a three player market a "dominant player".

        And I wouldn't call a four billion dollar loss a "dominant player". Other phrases come to mind, like "act of gross stupidity" and "shareholder lawsuit". Someday, Microsoft's universally appalling performance in everything but Windows and Office is going to come back and bite

        • Universally appalling? Check the facts. In almost everything that Microsoft pursues, they eventually become a large, dominant player. As for this console wars thing, look at Sony et al. They are going to have to subsidize their consoles heavily too.

          Microsoft is just playing the game; they've done it in the past, and they'll do it again. Look at everything microsoft "sucks" at first. Look at it 2-3 years later.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by TheRaven64 ( 641858 )
            Could you please list three things that Microsoft does other than Windows and Office which consistently make a profit? Market share is not important if you have to pour more money at it to maintain it than you get from having it; from a shareholder perspective, at least. People don't buy shares in MS because they want a slice of world domination, they buy them because they want a return on investment.
          • Universally appalling? Check the facts. In almost everything that Microsoft pursues, they eventually become a large, dominant player.

            I have checked the facts. Microsoft become a large dominant player who LOSES BILLIONS OF DOLLARS EVERY YEAR. By any reasonable measure, that is a disaster. Where did you get this idea that the objective was to make the biggest loss?

            Any idiot can become a large player if they can spend money like water and don't have to show a profit. Microsoft do not appear to have figured out

    • Do MS stockholders drink a lot?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by kfg ( 145172 ) *
      But at some point, the brute force method just isn't possible anymore - it eats far too many resources.

      You aren't suggesting that they shouldn't attack Iran, are you?

      KFG
      • Funny?! This is more like +5000 Insightful ... They simply can't attack them, because their resources are stretched to the limit. And they have to defeat a good-sized adversary with lots of money and sworn markets, not a dropout like the previous. Also the world is mostly getting tired of all the hassle.

        I am talking about MS, Sony and Netscape, not USA, Iran and Iraq. No, really.
  • by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2006 @09:12AM (#16137162) Journal
    Microsoft has only just started, and they managed to produce what took youTube well over a year to achieve.

    Certainly it isn't quite there. There will be a few bugs to sort out, and a few issues to resolve while they deal with technology to prevent users for flagrantly stealing music tracks and then selling them as videos, but Microsoft will get there. And it will be the best.

    Why do I think this? Because Microsoft care about Quality.

    They already have the worlds finest OS and the best office environment. Their search technology is second to none, and their entire online presense is increasing in leaps and bounds. Who could cope in today's online world without MSN messsenger or Outlook? They will soon dominate online videos, and then we'll see an amazing imprvement in this industry segment.
    • Who could cope in today's online world without MSN messsenger or Outlook?
      *Raises hand*
    • Why do I think this? Because Microsoft care about Quality.
      You must be new here.

      :-)
  • I don't get it (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Evro ( 18923 )
    Why does Microsoft feel the need to copy every single "new thing" out there? I realize they are incapable of innovation or independent thought, but the past 10 years for MS has been nothing but showing up to a party already in progress shouting "HEY GUYS, WE'RE HERE!!" With the Zume (after the DOA "Plays Anywhere" program) playing catch-up to the iPod and now Soapbox trying to play with YouTube and Google Video it's getting nauseatingly blatant. Tens of thousands of employees and still no innovation. Pr
    • They're not the only ones though - GMail followed in the footsteps of Hotmail, for example.
      • To a degree, but GMail did come with some innovations that changed web-based e-mail: large storage space, labeling instead of sorting into folders, relevant ad-delivered content, etc.

        It may not seem like much, but you have to admit that the large storage space forced other competitors to offer similar, which was very nice after suffering through the 2MB Hotmail restriction for years.

        Microsoft rarely - if ever - brings even that much novelty to the table with their offerings, although, in their defense, ther
      • GMail followed in the footsteps of Hotmail, true, but they actively improved the product by providing much bigger storage capacity, tagging, archiving, better keyboard shortcuts, conversation view, etc. Google is about taking products and figuring out how to make them better for geeky minds.

        No one cares that Microsoft comes late into new markets like this, we just want them to improve our experience instead of just assuming we'll switch because they're the big guys.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why do Linux people feel the need to get Linux to run on anything and everything? The answer is the same for both really... because they CAN.

      They've got more money than they know what to do with so what better use than to branch out into other areas if they feel like it.
    • You evaluate the current offerings and try to do the same thing, but better. Microsoft does this. They have Microsoft Research. There's nothing wrong with them getting into video sharing, although it is a bit of bizarre move. Microsoft's sins relate to the way they attempt to make life difficult for users of non-Microsoft software.

      Sometimes this involves going as far as preventing effective communication between users of Microsoft software and users of non-Microsoft software, for example, the proprietary an
      • by vleck ( 134134 )
        I don't have an "invitation" yet for Soapbox, but it looks like they are using Macromedia Flash Player as their video output format (from the intro video). It even has the MAC OSX "please wait" symbol while the video is loading... I was surprised why it doesn't require Windows Media Player.
        • by vleck ( 134134 )
          Duh, just read the article. I guess it only uses Flash for non-Internet Explorer browsers. They should save some space and just use Flash for everything.
  • From the article:


    • For its part, Soapbox is a solid video sharing service, incorporating all the Web 2.0 features a modern site should have.
    • You can tag videos and comment on them, and you can easily find videos based on tags or popularity.
    • You can also browse the video catalog without stopping the video you're watching, which is a nice user interface development.
    • Uploading is easy - a neat trick lets you upload videos in the background on your PC without requiring a standalone uploader application.
    • Videos can b
    • by Churla ( 936633 )
      What you fail to see here is that the reviewer apparently already had in mind what they wanted to say about MicroSoft and this project. That being "I'm underwhelmed and they could have done better." Then wrote the article. The article and what the author wanted to say dont have to strictly have any bearing on one another. You're trying to peddle your silly logic around here and sir, we simply aren't buying it!
  • MS 'innovation' - I love it.

    It seems they are so badly rattled right now they can't do anything original due to major (intellectual) insecurity. SoapBox is an idea popularised by uTube which they've then presented with Apple-style graphics. The typography of the SoapBox logo/name seems to be exactly what Apple have done on their website for a couple of years now (pretty much the same face I'd say) and the circular loading 'device' appears to be pretty much the standard OSX activity graphic.

    As for "loading..
    • Yeh, I noticed that. I wonder how long before they change it, possibly to hourglass that just goes on forever.
  • I associate soapboxes with "having something to say", not something that most of the youtube content is about. Then again the fact that Powerpoint is mostly used pointlessly hasn't harmed them.

  • But MS-DOS had nothing more to offer than CP/M, Word wasn't better than WordPerfect and Windows wasn't better than Mac or X-Windows. And we can go on and on.... When coming from Redmond, the first version is normally even worse than the competition, version 2 is normally on-par and then with version 3, MS takes over.

    Besides the quality and feature set of the products, this has of course also to do with the fact that by then the marketing machine is running at full throttle.

  • "Given Microsoft's position in the video sharing market (dead last), I expected a more aggressive product."

    Given their their dominant role in the consumer and business operating systems market I would expect them to not give a shit about (relative) chicken scratch. What, are they bored?

  • Oh wait, flash video is the only thing stopping MS domination of free web video, nevermind... oh but for everything else, flash sucks, except for online cartoons... those are kind cool too.
  • Why do I have to SignIn? Cant I just browse what's been uploaded?
  • Well, I wouldn't use the site because of the freakishly homosexual dancing butterfly you have to watch on the sign-on screen. Oh ya, whats with needing an account just to watch videos?
  • This isn't new Microsoft pushes a bellow average product in a field full of competition, they make a few proprietary formats, which are better than the product itself, they use this to lift their product up while slowly making changes. They also introduce a few niche concepts in their product after an initially slow start. They launch Soapbox with nothing in beta then in a few weeks put a bunch of more innovative ideas into it to show consumers they are still working on it. This is an affront to Google's b
  • There are so many reviews of video sharing sites that look at the features but miss the fundamentals.

    For example, speaking as someone who follows plenty of video links but doesn't use the service as an uploader, YouTube is unsatisfactory.
    1. Video quality is terrible. It's impossible to make out detail on interesting movies.
    2. No save function.
    3. YouTube's bandwidth is inadequate. It's set up to play immediately while streaming, but YouTube can't stream at the same speed the movie plays. (No, there is no bot
  • "Given Microsoft's position in the video sharing market (dead last), I expected a more aggressive product."

    Does this in turn mean that you would expect a 'less aggressive product' from the vs market leader?

    You seem to be overlooking the fact that MS has a generally poor record all around when it comes to video, which should mean lower expectations. I simply don't see how anything here comes as a surprise.
  • Maybe if they'd market something new instead of copying anything anyone else invents MicroSoft's stock would go up. Also, maybe they could productize some of the nifty inventions coming out its $5 billion research lab.
  • As soon as the page loaded in mozilla, it crashed with a seg fault. Hmmm...
  • When you're always trying to one-up viral online services like music and video they are bound to quickly lose those battles. If anyone thinks MS has gotten too big to be "viral" has never run ActiveX!

    They should really focus on their core technologies, because they are seriously becoming just another media-whore, just trying to get their brand in front of everyone's eyeballs. At what cost you say? C-R-E-D-I-B-I-L-I-T-Y!

  • As someone that posts a LOT of videos to youTube, Google Video, and Veoh - I just GOTTA chime in on this.

    First, I can't believe no one has mentioned Veoh.com yet and I'll tell you why in a minute.

    Second, as an AVID user of these services, I should explain what I need in this sort of service:

    1) Immediate access to my uploads. When 100% hits, I need to be able to shoot someone the URL to the file and they need to be able to get it (AFAIK, only Veoh allows immediate downloading of the file).
    2) Easy batch uplo
  • ...porn like xtube and pornotube.
  • The question is, should we scream in anger or feel relieved if the thing doesn't work with non-ie browsers?
  • The Reviewer expected something more aggressive.

    Has he thought about probable integration with Windows Media Player?
    Has he thought about probable integration with MSN (Live) Messenger and MSN Spaces?
    Has he thought about probable integration with Windows XP or Windows Vista?

    Plug in a webcam, Windows detects it, Windows asks if you want to publish your video.
    To MSN Soapbox ofcourse.
    Hurray.

    Not aggressive enough?

We have a equal opportunity Calculus class -- it's fully integrated.

Working...