5 ms·

"That would have been a huge mistake since it turns out that all of the videos did worse than all of the images." It annoys me no end when websites have videos

"That would have been a huge mistake since it turns out that all of the videos did worse than all of the images." It annoys me no end when websites have videos explaining their product and no equivalent text. I hate watching videos about products. Always make the video optional and secondary.

robryan 16y ago
I like when an image can turn into a video when clicked on, that way it acts as another screen for explanation but also a video if I want to watch it.
ryanwaggoner 16y ago
Yes, always. Assuming your audience is maxklein. Otherwise, best to test.
- maxklein 16y ago
  Obamas audience was massive. Millions and millions of people. I believe that's representative of the general taste of people.
  - ryanwaggoner 16y ago
    True, but extrapolating this single test with a particular audience looking for a particular type of information and being presented with these particular images and videos out to all websites is probably not the wisest thing.
    - maxklein 16y ago
      Of course, that's true, but we can't test EVERYTHING. If a very large test has been made with a very general population, then I think one should just make the assumption that will work similarly on your audience. If we start testing everything, we'll just be stuck testing the whole time! There are an infinite number of things to test, if there is a large and credible study showing one particular thing to be true, and no "anti" study, then I will just accept it and not retest it. Rather, I test things unique to my product or presentation. Running a test, particularly a multivariate test is not an easy or quick task. It requires a lot to do it properly, and if I had to do hundreds of them, I'd be wasting a lot of time. Most times as a small company, one should not be focusing on if a button is red or green, but on if you are at all in the right business. Such small-scale and detailed testing is really a way to stick your head in the sand, when larger optimisations or corrections could lead to a much much bigger jump.
      - ryanwaggoner 16y ago
        I get what you're saying, and you're not wrong in general, but in this specific case, there are plenty of counter-examples. For example, there's an awful lot of affiliate marketers out there who have found that video squeeze pages convert at a much higher rate than text squeeze pages. And they only know that because they tested the shit out of the options, not because they prefer one over the other. I hate watching a 5-minute video when I could skim-read a 30-second block of text instead. But I'm not necessarily representative of the population as a whole. And specifically as it relates to text over video, a huge number of people are finding that video converts better than text for their audience. YMMV.
        Flenser 16y ago
        >I hate watching a 5-minute video when I could skim-read a 30-second block of text instead. But it may be that even if the majority of people feel like that the people that will watch the video will convert better than the people that will read or skim-read a block of text.
- Natsu 16y ago
  You're right that they should test, because their audience might be different. But I admit to being the same way as him: when I hit an article that's nothing but video, I skip it. I can read a lot faster than they can talk and I could have read a lot of other things in the time it takes to watch a video. I also have a lot of things I want to read and nowhere near enough time to read them all. In fact, there was an article here on HN that linked to a bare video. I was going to read the article, but when I saw it was a video, I closed the tab immediately. So be sure to test and make sure, but remember that there might well be a lot of others like me who would rather read than watch a video.
  - harisenbon 16y ago
    I'm similar. I'll watch about 2 minutes of a video, and see if the presentation is engaging enough to warrant spending the time to watch the video. If I can download the video, I do that and watch it on my trainride home. Else the window gets closed
ugh 16y ago
It would be interesting to know how Dropbox is doing. http://dropbox.com/ http://dropbox.com/ shows nothing but their logo, a big play button (with “Watch a Video” as a caption) and a big blue “Download Dropbox” button. No explanation beyond the video (more than two minutes runtime), not even a hint at what Dropbox is doing on that page. You have to click if you want to know what Dropbox is. Did they test that? Does it work because it is hard to concisely describe all the strengths of Dropbox? Maybe it works because the main vector for the recruitment of users are invitation emails which do include a short description of Dropbox?

robryan 16y ago

I like when an image can turn into a video when clicked on, that way it acts as another screen for explanation but also a video if I want to watch it.

ryanwaggoner 16y ago

Yes, always. Assuming your audience is maxklein. Otherwise, best to test.

maxklein 16y ago
Obamas audience was massive. Millions and millions of people. I believe that's representative of the general taste of people.
- ryanwaggoner 16y ago
  True, but extrapolating this single test with a particular audience looking for a particular type of information and being presented with these particular images and videos out to all websites is probably not the wisest thing.
  - maxklein 16y ago
    Of course, that's true, but we can't test EVERYTHING. If a very large test has been made with a very general population, then I think one should just make the assumption that will work similarly on your audience. If we start testing everything, we'll just be stuck testing the whole time! There are an infinite number of things to test, if there is a large and credible study showing one particular thing to be true, and no "anti" study, then I will just accept it and not retest it. Rather, I test things unique to my product or presentation. Running a test, particularly a multivariate test is not an easy or quick task. It requires a lot to do it properly, and if I had to do hundreds of them, I'd be wasting a lot of time. Most times as a small company, one should not be focusing on if a button is red or green, but on if you are at all in the right business. Such small-scale and detailed testing is really a way to stick your head in the sand, when larger optimisations or corrections could lead to a much much bigger jump.
    - ryanwaggoner 16y ago
      I get what you're saying, and you're not wrong in general, but in this specific case, there are plenty of counter-examples. For example, there's an awful lot of affiliate marketers out there who have found that video squeeze pages convert at a much higher rate than text squeeze pages. And they only know that because they tested the shit out of the options, not because they prefer one over the other. I hate watching a 5-minute video when I could skim-read a 30-second block of text instead. But I'm not necessarily representative of the population as a whole. And specifically as it relates to text over video, a huge number of people are finding that video converts better than text for their audience. YMMV.
      - Flenser 16y ago
        >I hate watching a 5-minute video when I could skim-read a 30-second block of text instead. But it may be that even if the majority of people feel like that the people that will watch the video will convert better than the people that will read or skim-read a block of text.
Natsu 16y ago
You're right that they should test, because their audience might be different. But I admit to being the same way as him: when I hit an article that's nothing but video, I skip it. I can read a lot faster than they can talk and I could have read a lot of other things in the time it takes to watch a video. I also have a lot of things I want to read and nowhere near enough time to read them all. In fact, there was an article here on HN that linked to a bare video. I was going to read the article, but when I saw it was a video, I closed the tab immediately. So be sure to test and make sure, but remember that there might well be a lot of others like me who would rather read than watch a video.
- harisenbon 16y ago
  I'm similar. I'll watch about 2 minutes of a video, and see if the presentation is engaging enough to warrant spending the time to watch the video. If I can download the video, I do that and watch it on my trainride home. Else the window gets closed

ugh 16y ago

It would be interesting to know how Dropbox is doing. http://dropbox.com/ http://dropbox.com/ shows nothing but their logo, a big play button (with “Watch a Video” as a caption) and a big blue “Download Dropbox” button. No explanation beyond the video (more than two minutes runtime), not even a hint at what Dropbox is doing on that page. You have to click if you want to know what Dropbox is. Did they test that? Does it work because it is hard to concisely describe all the strengths of Dropbox? Maybe it works because the main vector for the recruitment of users are invitation emails which do include a short description of Dropbox?