3 ms·
So in other words, they have an average of 1320 feeds going at any time. That's nothing to sneeze at, but the YouTube comparison doesn't seem quite apples to a
by prospero 17y ago
So in other words, they have an average of 1320 feeds going at any time. That's nothing to sneeze at, but the YouTube comparison doesn't seem quite apples to apples.
- icey 17y agoThe fact that Justin.tv is beating YouTube in terms of volume of content creation is at least impressive to me.
- prospero 17y agoNot all content is made equal. On average, I'd say there's more than a minute's worth of effort put into each minute of video posted to YouTube. Most of the feeds on live video sites are static cameras pointed at televisions, puppies, etc. There's some effort involved in setting these things up, but it's certainly less than 1:1 with the amount of footage being uploaded. I'm not trying to trivialize justin.tv's accomplishment, I just don't think it's a particularly useful comparison.
- DarkShikari 17y agoThat's actually a really interesting metric: the amount of effort per minute of video. A quick mental runthrough of various video sites I've used suggests this would be an effective predictor of content quality.
- jonknee 17y agoNot really, all those live cams on 24/7 are a massive amount of content. Mostly worthless content, but content nonetheless.
- abossy 17y agoIndeed. Another question worth noting is, how many people are watching? The ratio of consumers to producers is big -- the fact that YouTube has people to watch all the content produced on it is what's remarkable about it.
- abstractbill 17y agohow many people are watching? We're getting close to half a billion pageviews per month, the majority of which are on channel pages. http://www.quantcast.com/justin.tv http://www.quantcast.com/justin.tv