![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Most of us know what "tl;dr"(*) means, right?
I'd like to propose a video equivalent: "vo;dw" or "video only, didn't watch". I'm getting more and more impatient with web content that is presented solely in video format. The problem with video over text is that I have to consume video at the pace and in the order in which it's presented. With text content I can (a) skim it quickly to see if it's worth reading in detail, and (b) skip around to the parts I find interesting (or skip over parts I don't need to see). In short, *I* can control how I consume text content(**), whereas my consumption of video content is at the mercy of the creator. I've said too many times, "I'd like those nine minutes of my life back".
So: even though I love my friends dearly, if anyone posts a link to a video I won't watch it unless it's accompanied by either a concise summary of the content or a pointer to a transcript. Life is just too short.
(*) "too long; didn't read"
(**) though I'm really annoyed by articles that are broken into a zillion pages so as to maximize ad impressions. I'm starting to give them a pass as well if they don't have a "View as one page" option...
I'd like to propose a video equivalent: "vo;dw" or "video only, didn't watch". I'm getting more and more impatient with web content that is presented solely in video format. The problem with video over text is that I have to consume video at the pace and in the order in which it's presented. With text content I can (a) skim it quickly to see if it's worth reading in detail, and (b) skip around to the parts I find interesting (or skip over parts I don't need to see). In short, *I* can control how I consume text content(**), whereas my consumption of video content is at the mercy of the creator. I've said too many times, "I'd like those nine minutes of my life back".
So: even though I love my friends dearly, if anyone posts a link to a video I won't watch it unless it's accompanied by either a concise summary of the content or a pointer to a transcript. Life is just too short.
(*) "too long; didn't read"
(**) though I'm really annoyed by articles that are broken into a zillion pages so as to maximize ad impressions. I'm starting to give them a pass as well if they don't have a "View as one page" option...
no subject
Date: 2012-01-28 12:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-30 02:39 pm (UTC)(b) yeah, what you said (read piecemeal).
(c) yeah, what you said (your own pace).
(d) easier to quote from a transcript, if I want to quote part.
(e) I usually have to close a dozen other windows first before I can watch video w/o choppiness and hiccups or even lengthy pauses, so I need some information with which to judge whether it's worth bookmarking a bunch of get-back-to-this pages and closing their tabs to watch the video.
(And that zillion-pieces trick? So thrilled when I open-in-background a bunch of pages I want to read, then put my computer to sleep and cary it to someplace where I'll have time to kill but no Internet connection, only to find that I've got the first 10-20% of each of a dozen articles. *grrr* Or when a freaking text article is on a page with so much embedded -- and sloppy -- Javascript that it takes ten minutes to get the browser to respond to my attempts to close that window (I don't click on IO9 link much any more), or when there's an auto-refresh to get new ads that causes the page to scroll back to the top every half minute so I have to keep scrolling back down to find my place again. HTML can be extremely lean and clean -- you have to work to make it that broken ... but people do.)
no subject
Date: 2012-01-30 07:48 pm (UTC)WTF is up with people posting recipes to a video? GIVE ME THE TEXT. Sure, have a video demonstrating a technique, but I don't think I've ever made anything from a TV cooking show, because I don't have a recipe I can refer to (I'm sure these days I could go to a website and find them, but these days I don't watch cooking shows, so....)