9 ms·

I don't understand why a new app if this could just be an additional feature in the current app. Doesn't this lead to fragmentation and confusion?

dubcanada 10y ago
Yes, but Google is exceptionally good at fragmentation and confusion in regards to products. How many gmail apps do they have? Inbox, gmail, android mail (though this got deprecated), web interface, etc. Youtube now has 2 apps, a web interface. They seem to like to make new stuff, rather then upgrade their existing stuff. Then every second year they just go through their stack and deprecate 30% of it.
- Spivak 10y ago
  You're forgetting that they also have YouTube Gaming [1] as another separate app. [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.youtube.gaming https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
  - wwarren 10y ago
    Don't forget YouTube Kids as well! https://appsto.re/ca/U1q23.i https://appsto.re/ca/U1q23.i
    - 8ytecoder 10y ago
      And YT Music too!
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > Youtube now has 2 apps At least 6 apps. Youtube, Youtube Creator Studio, Youtube Kids, Youtube Music, Youtube Gaming, Youtube Go
  - Navarr 10y ago
    One of these things is not like the others YouTube Creator Studio of course is a different app for managing your channel - which is great - I think it's a fantastic separation of concerns. One app for consuming, another for moderation/management. But then yes, you've got: * YouTube (proper) * YouTube Kids * YouTube Music * YouTube Gaming * YouTube GO and I believe more are coming.
- ashark 10y ago
  > Inbox, gmail, android mail (though this got deprecated) Don't forget the cleanest, best-performing one: the classic "Basic HTML" interface. Which manages to be much faster for most operations than Inbox or the AJAXified normal version despited having to reload the whole page.
  - movedx 10y ago
    You just have to love that classic approach to web development, right? JavaScript is great for improving the user experience, but it's often vastly overused and just makes me scream for simpler times such as the classic web app.
    - ashark 10y ago
      I'm increasingly convinced that much better solutions to most of the problems Javascript and AJAX solve ("solve") would have been better frames and improved HTML forms.
      - movedx 10y ago
        Exactly! I use Bootstrap for the auto-scaling to the device, and AlpacaJS for the dynamically generated and adjustable forms... but that's it. That's all I want from JS: form management and validation, and responsive design (and I believe the latter is done in pure CSS anyway?)
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      "Modern" web has made me embrace back native development and see the web as HTML/CSS only, as it should have stayed.
      - movedx 10y ago
        I totally agree. JavaScript for dynamic forms and validation, and any responsive design functionality it gives me through the use of Bootstrap/SemanticUI... that's it.
  - 10y ago
- joncalhoun 10y ago
  While I agree fragmentation can be bad, YouTube is one area where I think this makes sense. What a gamer wants in an app is going to be very different to what someone seeking educational content is going to want. Similarly, a kids app is very useful given how many kids are growing up using cheap tablets to stream videos, and I know from watching my nephews that the way they use YouTube is very different from how I use it.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> I don't understand why a new app if this could just be an additional feature in the current app. Its a ground-up rewrite of the app with a very different experience focus and for a different audience. It wouldn't make much sense as a feature of the existing app.
- ksk 10y ago
  But why would it need a rewrite? Adding a download and some other buttons? >It wouldn't make much sense as a feature of the existing app. Why?
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > But why would it need a rewrite? Because the UX focus is different, the assumed technical infrastructure context is different, and, well, basically everything except the backend service consumed is different. Youtube Go is more distinct in role from the core Youtube app than the other break out apps (which mostly are distinguished by content focus on UX tweaks around the focal content) like Youtube Kids, Youtube Music, and Youtube Gaming.
    - ksk 10y ago
      I guess we have to agree to disagree. I don't think adding a button or two is some fundamental change that requires 10 meetings with 2 designers and 5 developers. They're already streaming the video data, just save it to a file in addition/option to rendering it. They can already play video data, just play it from the file instead of streaming it.
      - teach 10y ago
        In my opinion, default offline vs default online is a HUGE architectural difference. You could probably try to hack it into the existing player, but it wouldn't work well. A ground-up rewrite wouldn't surprise me at all for such a change.
timdeneau 10y ago
It’s a step in the right direction supporting offline first, encouraging to see this. But I’m also a little disappointed it’s a separate app, and country specific from what I can determine. It would be great to see this rolled into the current app without restriction.
tanmayrajani 10y ago
IMO, that's because YouTube Go is an app with experimental features. They're not sure whether these features make complete sense for adding all of them blindly to YouTube app itself.
zardeh 10y ago
Because this application cares a lot more about footprint size than normal Youtube.

dubcanada 10y ago

Yes, but Google is exceptionally good at fragmentation and confusion in regards to products. How many gmail apps do they have? Inbox, gmail, android mail (though this got deprecated), web interface, etc. Youtube now has 2 apps, a web interface. They seem to like to make new stuff, rather then upgrade their existing stuff. Then every second year they just go through their stack and deprecate 30% of it.

Spivak 10y ago
You're forgetting that they also have YouTube Gaming [1] as another separate app. [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.youtube.gaming https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
- wwarren 10y ago
  Don't forget YouTube Kids as well! https://appsto.re/ca/U1q23.i https://appsto.re/ca/U1q23.i
  - 8ytecoder 10y ago
    And YT Music too!
dragonwriter 10y ago
> Youtube now has 2 apps At least 6 apps. Youtube, Youtube Creator Studio, Youtube Kids, Youtube Music, Youtube Gaming, Youtube Go
- Navarr 10y ago
  One of these things is not like the others YouTube Creator Studio of course is a different app for managing your channel - which is great - I think it's a fantastic separation of concerns. One app for consuming, another for moderation/management. But then yes, you've got: * YouTube (proper) * YouTube Kids * YouTube Music * YouTube Gaming * YouTube GO and I believe more are coming.
ashark 10y ago
> Inbox, gmail, android mail (though this got deprecated) Don't forget the cleanest, best-performing one: the classic "Basic HTML" interface. Which manages to be much faster for most operations than Inbox or the AJAXified normal version despited having to reload the whole page.
- movedx 10y ago
  You just have to love that classic approach to web development, right? JavaScript is great for improving the user experience, but it's often vastly overused and just makes me scream for simpler times such as the classic web app.
  - ashark 10y ago
    I'm increasingly convinced that much better solutions to most of the problems Javascript and AJAX solve ("solve") would have been better frames and improved HTML forms.
    - movedx 10y ago
      Exactly! I use Bootstrap for the auto-scaling to the device, and AlpacaJS for the dynamically generated and adjustable forms... but that's it. That's all I want from JS: form management and validation, and responsive design (and I believe the latter is done in pure CSS anyway?)
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    "Modern" web has made me embrace back native development and see the web as HTML/CSS only, as it should have stayed.
    - movedx 10y ago
      I totally agree. JavaScript for dynamic forms and validation, and any responsive design functionality it gives me through the use of Bootstrap/SemanticUI... that's it.
- 10y ago
joncalhoun 10y ago
While I agree fragmentation can be bad, YouTube is one area where I think this makes sense. What a gamer wants in an app is going to be very different to what someone seeking educational content is going to want. Similarly, a kids app is very useful given how many kids are growing up using cheap tablets to stream videos, and I know from watching my nephews that the way they use YouTube is very different from how I use it.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> I don't understand why a new app if this could just be an additional feature in the current app. Its a ground-up rewrite of the app with a very different experience focus and for a different audience. It wouldn't make much sense as a feature of the existing app.

ksk 10y ago
But why would it need a rewrite? Adding a download and some other buttons? >It wouldn't make much sense as a feature of the existing app. Why?
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > But why would it need a rewrite? Because the UX focus is different, the assumed technical infrastructure context is different, and, well, basically everything except the backend service consumed is different. Youtube Go is more distinct in role from the core Youtube app than the other break out apps (which mostly are distinguished by content focus on UX tweaks around the focal content) like Youtube Kids, Youtube Music, and Youtube Gaming.
  - ksk 10y ago
    I guess we have to agree to disagree. I don't think adding a button or two is some fundamental change that requires 10 meetings with 2 designers and 5 developers. They're already streaming the video data, just save it to a file in addition/option to rendering it. They can already play video data, just play it from the file instead of streaming it.
    - teach 10y ago
      In my opinion, default offline vs default online is a HUGE architectural difference. You could probably try to hack it into the existing player, but it wouldn't work well. A ground-up rewrite wouldn't surprise me at all for such a change.

timdeneau 10y ago

It’s a step in the right direction supporting offline first, encouraging to see this. But I’m also a little disappointed it’s a separate app, and country specific from what I can determine. It would be great to see this rolled into the current app without restriction.

tanmayrajani 10y ago

IMO, that's because YouTube Go is an app with experimental features. They're not sure whether these features make complete sense for adding all of them blindly to YouTube app itself.

zardeh 10y ago

Because this application cares a lot more about footprint size than normal Youtube.