4 ms·

I've lurked here for months, but this article and the responses has led me to register and comment. If you're debating the merits of scribd vs a pdf file, you

I've lurked here for months, but this article and the responses has led me to register and comment. If you're debating the merits of scribd vs a pdf file, you've missed the whole point. That's like debating youtube vs. [insert video format here]. Who cares if you can do more with the pdf or .avi file? Scribd is a service that hosts files. The same logic that says pdf files are 'better' would lead you to host the raw DV capture on your own server instead of uploading it to youtube. When the goal is sharing your video/document with other people, does that make any sense? Also as many have pointed out every argument made in the article is pretty much wrong. Downloading works, copy paste works, etc. No they're not in competition with adobe, adobe doesn't host files... Ultimately scribd is about sharing, and it pretty much whips ass at that.

mikeryan 18y ago
You miss the point PDF files don't need a common platform. IT IS a common platform. PDF is ubiquitous and full featured, there's no need to change file format in order to share it. The author's argument is ff scribd is a service to host files then do it - host the files, don't convert them to an inferior format. Heck instead of iPaper why not just convert them to PDF to begin with and save the intermediary.
- deathbob 18y ago
  "You miss the point [avi] files don't need a common platform. IT IS a common platform. [avi] is ubiquitous and full featured, there's no need to change file format in order to share it. The author's arguments is if [youtube] is a service to host files then do it - host the files, don't convert them to an inferior format. Heck instead of [flv] why not just convert them to [mpeg2] to begin with and save the intermediary. See how ridiculous that sounds? Also, Scribd doesn't just host pdf files, they host others too. If you had to write software to translate multiple source languages to one language, would you compile down to a language you control every aspect of (ipaper) or one you do not control (pdf)?
  - mikeryan 18y ago
    Wait I see what you did there. Awesome you waited all this time to comment on a post, just to not argue the authors point? I read the article it never seemed to argue the point of the service its whole point was about the necessity of changing file formats. Nice Red Herring, you're even getting points for it.
    - deathbob 18y ago
      As near as I can tell the authors point is "all [scribd] does is strip me of basic functionality...So some engineers could do some flash-based masturbation & feel web 2.0". It's just an ignorant rant. Plenty of other people pointed out that scribd has the features he claims it lacks, I didn't feel the need to echo that. What I did feel was important is that the author of the article missed the point of why scribd exists entirely. It does not exist to strip functionality or demo flash skills, or to "lock things up by placing it in their own jackass format". Scribd is a service that allows people to share documents. I thought pointing out the parallels between the service youtube offers and what scribd does, and the compromises inherent in implementing such a service would be illuminating, but apparently it's not helping you. I also said that since scribd basically translates all the various formats uploaded to one standard display format, it makes sense that they have total control over the end format. I thought that shed some light on why they chose to use ipaper instead of pdf or any other format, but apparently you don't agree. Whatever. p.s. Let me know when i can turn my points in for a prize.
MaysonL 18y ago
Scribd sucks: it's slow to load, slow to scroll, and ugly to boot. It hosts files, yes, but it does so very badly.

mikeryan 18y ago

You miss the point PDF files don't need a common platform. IT IS a common platform. PDF is ubiquitous and full featured, there's no need to change file format in order to share it. The author's argument is ff scribd is a service to host files then do it - host the files, don't convert them to an inferior format. Heck instead of iPaper why not just convert them to PDF to begin with and save the intermediary.

deathbob 18y ago
"You miss the point [avi] files don't need a common platform. IT IS a common platform. [avi] is ubiquitous and full featured, there's no need to change file format in order to share it. The author's arguments is if [youtube] is a service to host files then do it - host the files, don't convert them to an inferior format. Heck instead of [flv] why not just convert them to [mpeg2] to begin with and save the intermediary. See how ridiculous that sounds? Also, Scribd doesn't just host pdf files, they host others too. If you had to write software to translate multiple source languages to one language, would you compile down to a language you control every aspect of (ipaper) or one you do not control (pdf)?
- mikeryan 18y ago
  Wait I see what you did there. Awesome you waited all this time to comment on a post, just to not argue the authors point? I read the article it never seemed to argue the point of the service its whole point was about the necessity of changing file formats. Nice Red Herring, you're even getting points for it.
  - deathbob 18y ago
    As near as I can tell the authors point is "all [scribd] does is strip me of basic functionality...So some engineers could do some flash-based masturbation & feel web 2.0". It's just an ignorant rant. Plenty of other people pointed out that scribd has the features he claims it lacks, I didn't feel the need to echo that. What I did feel was important is that the author of the article missed the point of why scribd exists entirely. It does not exist to strip functionality or demo flash skills, or to "lock things up by placing it in their own jackass format". Scribd is a service that allows people to share documents. I thought pointing out the parallels between the service youtube offers and what scribd does, and the compromises inherent in implementing such a service would be illuminating, but apparently it's not helping you. I also said that since scribd basically translates all the various formats uploaded to one standard display format, it makes sense that they have total control over the end format. I thought that shed some light on why they chose to use ipaper instead of pdf or any other format, but apparently you don't agree. Whatever. p.s. Let me know when i can turn my points in for a prize.

MaysonL 18y ago

Scribd sucks: it's slow to load, slow to scroll, and ugly to boot. It hosts files, yes, but it does so very badly.