>This is the reason for my strong dislike of online content moving to video. It's way, way harder to skim a video to see if it's decent quality. It depends on

>This is the reason for my strong dislike of online content moving to video. It's way, way harder to skim a video to see if it's decent quality. It depends on what people mean by "hardware". If the hardware is comparing something like graphics cards, then yes, text content with table of performance numbers and some charts is faster to parse. But if the hardware is more physical hands-on like mechanical tools, drones, grills, etc, videos of people demonstrating its use and/or reveal the flaws is easier and faster to digest. ("Picture is worth a thousand words.") E.g. a Youtube video comparing a bunch of miter gauges is better than a magazine article that's just text and photos. Text+photos is too static so the reader can't see and hear the slop in bad products that machined are out of tolerance. Conveying that type of quality is more effective in videos. If you're viewing Youtube on desktop instead of mobile, the fastest way to to skim is to press the keys 1 to 9 on the keyboard which jumps to timeline at 10%, 20%, 30% ... 90%. There's latency for 2160 4k 60ps videos but for lower bandwidth videos, it works well. If the video looks good, press 0 to rewind to the beginning.