ONLINE FILE W8.4 Eyespot
Easy-to-use video uploading and remixing.
Bright and colorful. Tagging, forums, groups. Not a lot of com- munity features (end of 2006).
Trim begin- ning and end, reorder clips on a timeline, add music and photos.
Chapter Eight: Social Networks and Industry Disruptors in the Web 2.0 Environment
Comparison of 10 Video-Sharing Services
Create, edit, and remix video online.
The global home for grassroots media.
Looks like YouTube with a file-sharing application built on top. For full function- ality, requires an application download. Windows Media Player–based (converts other formats). Ratings, tag- ging, groups, RSS feeds.
Slick interface feels more like an applica- tion than a Web page. Scales all videos to a larger size than other sites, but videos do not autoplay, and there is no indication of what portion of the video has already been downloaded.
Slow, confusing, and messy. Requires an Internet Archive account, and the integration of the two services is convoluted. Keeps your content in its native format, which is both good and bad—it does not recompress your video, but it requires its users to have several different players installed correctly. Creative Commons’ licenses built-in.
Create mashups videos and pho- tos, set to music (“groovies”).
Bar none the best editing options of the bunch. Splice your footage, reorder the shots, and add music, photos, and transitions.
Grouper It’s Google.
Typical clean and sparse Google layout. Uploading requires down- load of the Google Video uploader. Supports plenty of metadata, including a transcript. You can monetize your content by assigning a sale price to each clip (you can also give users a “day pass,” giv- ing them access to the content for a limited time, but not ownership). None