5 ms·

Always text over video. When people say they prefer video, they don't know better, haven't actually been learning anything or are extremely lazy. For example,

Always text over video. When people say they prefer video, they don't know better, haven't actually been learning anything or are extremely lazy. For example, to do a gradient in Gimp, you should know a few shortcode keys. Now how do I look up which key to use again? Load the video and keep fiddling with the player until I hit the right moment where he explains this little detail? It's extremely annoying to look up anything in a video. You also waste a shitload of time because you can't just skim through all the stuff you already know. Video tutorials are only popular because Google boosts Youtube videos over text in search. The creators don't care that it's a bad medium for you, because it's an excellent medium for them. Way more revenue to gain from a Youtube video then some blogpost

aeternum 5y ago
For things like fixing a car part or home repair video is much better than text. There's nothing like watching someone do it, quickly seeing the exact location of things and how they should be moved.
- avgDev 5y ago
  This isn't true. Once you know cars enough, the same thing applies to car repair. I just need the torque specs for the bolts, I don't need or want to watch a whole video.
  - aeternum 5y ago
    Most people aren't car experts
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - thekevjames 5y ago
      Most people aren't software engineers, either.
outside1234 5y ago
I think it is an "AND" vs. "OR" thing. Your examples are great for those use cases, but there are others where having the long form is really good. For example, Jon Gjengset's Rust series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O0Nt9qY_vo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O0Nt9qY_vo
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dncornholio 5y ago
  You are right, a tutorial is even better if it has text AND a video :) laracasts does this extremely well.
criddell 5y ago
Always text over video? I disagree. Things like Khan Academy work much better than reading a textbook for a lot of people. Also, video guitar tutorials (Justin Sandercoe's are great) are wonderful because it gives you something to play along to.
- dncornholio 5y ago
  Agree. I was exclusively talking about programming / computer things tutorials. And from my memory, Khan Acadamy always has so much more then just video and text, which is even better! Very short videos help too.
saurik 5y ago
This has got to be the worst example you could have used: clearly video is better for this, right? You are talking about a sequence of steps in a GUI... sure, the least important one of those steps might have a keyboard shortcut, but that would be something you'd find later (and I don't think anyone is suggesting replacing a quick reference card with a video) and isn't a "learning" step. A textual description of this is going to be extremely awkward, attempting to describe dialog panels and icons and explain the semantics of color choosers... even the process of actually using a gradient tool is something that involves angles and lines and mouse placement: it isn't some abstract transform or fill, it is something that has a required direction semantic. I am 40, I learned to program using physical book instruction manuals, I absolutely love reading things, and yet it just feels so obvious that if I want to learn how to use a gradient tool I would want a video. If I couldn't get a video I would want an animation. If I couldn't get an animation I would want a flip book of screen shots. If I couldn't get a flip book of screen shots I would tolerate some illustrated prose... but if you couldn't even get me the illustrations I am frankly at an age where I simultaneously know that life is short and yet there is virtue in patience and so I would work on something else until I could find a video (or another human to show it to me in person, which would probably be the best option) rather than waste my time trying to interpret someone describing a purely graphical concept using text.

aeternum 5y ago

For things like fixing a car part or home repair video is much better than text. There's nothing like watching someone do it, quickly seeing the exact location of things and how they should be moved.

avgDev 5y ago
This isn't true. Once you know cars enough, the same thing applies to car repair. I just need the torque specs for the bolts, I don't need or want to watch a whole video.
- aeternum 5y ago
  Most people aren't car experts
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - thekevjames 5y ago
    Most people aren't software engineers, either.

outside1234 5y ago

I think it is an "AND" vs. "OR" thing. Your examples are great for those use cases, but there are others where having the long form is really good. For example, Jon Gjengset's Rust series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O0Nt9qY_vo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O0Nt9qY_vo

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dncornholio 5y ago
You are right, a tutorial is even better if it has text AND a video :) laracasts does this extremely well.

criddell 5y ago

Always text over video? I disagree. Things like Khan Academy work much better than reading a textbook for a lot of people. Also, video guitar tutorials (Justin Sandercoe's are great) are wonderful because it gives you something to play along to.

dncornholio 5y ago
Agree. I was exclusively talking about programming / computer things tutorials. And from my memory, Khan Acadamy always has so much more then just video and text, which is even better! Very short videos help too.

saurik 5y ago

This has got to be the worst example you could have used: clearly video is better for this, right? You are talking about a sequence of steps in a GUI... sure, the least important one of those steps might have a keyboard shortcut, but that would be something you'd find later (and I don't think anyone is suggesting replacing a quick reference card with a video) and isn't a "learning" step. A textual description of this is going to be extremely awkward, attempting to describe dialog panels and icons and explain the semantics of color choosers... even the process of actually using a gradient tool is something that involves angles and lines and mouse placement: it isn't some abstract transform or fill, it is something that has a required direction semantic. I am 40, I learned to program using physical book instruction manuals, I absolutely love reading things, and yet it just feels so obvious that if I want to learn how to use a gradient tool I would want a video. If I couldn't get a video I would want an animation. If I couldn't get an animation I would want a flip book of screen shots. If I couldn't get a flip book of screen shots I would tolerate some illustrated prose... but if you couldn't even get me the illustrations I am frankly at an age where I simultaneously know that life is short and yet there is virtue in patience and so I would work on something else until I could find a video (or another human to show it to me in person, which would probably be the best option) rather than waste my time trying to interpret someone describing a purely graphical concept using text.