Comcast confirms it's developing a YouTube competitor

Himanshu Arora

Posts: 902   +7
Comcast is working on a YouTube-like video streaming service and is planning to launch it to a limited set of customers by the end of the year, according to the company's senior vice president of video Matt Strauss.

[newwindow="https://www.techspot.com/news/57086-comcast-confirms-its-developing-a-youtube-competitor.html"]Read more[/newwindow]
 
G

Guest

LMAO...good luck. Seriously, who thought this would be a good idea?
Well, considering the advertising wreck that YouTube has become, anything like this is a good idea at this stage. I hope every time I hear news like this that someone out there has the shear gall to make a service that can unseat YouTube as the go to service. Competition is needed, and right now the closest competitor is leagues behind, if only in popularity.
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,605   +3,525
LMAO...good luck. Seriously, who thought this would be a good idea?
Well, considering the advertising wreck that YouTube has become, anything like this is a good idea at this stage. I hope every time I hear news like this that someone out there has the shear gall to make a service that can unseat YouTube as the go to service. Competition is needed, and right now the closest competitor is leagues behind, if only in popularity.
does no one have adblock? Lets say coke has a monopoly so someone comes out with pepsi, I still like coke more so I will continue drinking coke. Youtube is the goto service because it is the best service. There is no shortage of video hosting and streaming sites. The reason everyone goes to youtube is that it is the best service. I run adblock in chrome so I don't see any advertisements anyway.
 

Teko03

Posts: 621   +329
does no one have adblock? Lets say coke has a monopoly so someone comes out with pepsi, I still like coke more so I will continue drinking coke. Youtube is the goto service because it is the best service. There is no shortage of video hosting and streaming sites. The reason everyone goes to youtube is that it is the best service. I run adblock in chrome so I don't see any advertisements anyway.

A large number of users watch YouTube users watch videos on smartphones, smartTV's and tablets. I personally rarely ever visit YouTube when I'm on my desktop. So AdBlock isn't really a solution to avoiding ads. So the advertistment saturation point is huge. The only challenge is being able to create a video streaming service on par with or better than YouTube.
 

gobbybobby

Posts: 555   +9
Comcast will simply but a redirect off all there Broadband customers on youtube.com to there new website. :)

and if you do find a way round that don't worry they will slow it to a snails pace too because **** net neutrality :)
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,605   +3,525
A large number of users watch YouTube users watch videos on smartphones, smartTV's and tablets. I personally rarely ever visit YouTube when I'm on my desktop. So AdBlock isn't really a solution to avoiding ads. So the advertistment saturation point is huge. The only challenge is being able to create a video streaming service on par with or better than YouTube.

You can get adblock on android. And nowhere does it say that comcast's service will be ad free either.
 

Scshadow

Posts: 642   +300
I know a business entrepreneur can't be afraid of a little competition. I know you have to take a shot here and there. high risk, high reward. But its Youtube. Its fricken iconic. The video views are in the trillions or worse. But yeah, the alternatives suck. And almost everything is still based on flash isn't it? I'm about done with flash.
 

robb213

Posts: 349   +114
A large number of users watch YouTube users watch videos on smartphones, smartTV's and tablets. I personally rarely ever visit YouTube when I'm on my desktop. So AdBlock isn't really a solution to avoiding ads. So the advertistment saturation point is huge. The only challenge is being able to create a video streaming service on par with or better than YouTube.

You can get adblock on android. And nowhere does it say that comcast's service will be ad free either.
There's also Adblock for the mobile browsers as well, and the site performs nearly or equally as well to the application imo.


Anyways, I'll wait to hear when Comcast starts paying people to use their site so they don't have to admit it was a failure.
 

Teko03

Posts: 621   +329
There's also Adblock for the mobile browsers as well, and the site performs nearly or equally as well to the application imo.


Anyways, I'll wait to hear when Comcast starts paying people to use their site so they don't have to admit it was a failure.

I'm referring to the YouTube apps. There's no way to block those video ad's....not on a non-rooted device at least.
 

tehxion

Posts: 21   +15
The timing seems right. Comcast can now force youtube into the 'slow lane' while delivering it's own version on the 'fast lane' thus gaining an unfair advantage with quality of service.

Comcast can also use its own version as leverage against Google - want Youtube to carry the same or better quality of service as our own version, then pay up!!

Its a win-win for Comcast; launch their own service and profit from their delivery monopoly whether that service fails or not, Comcast still wins.
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,605   +3,525
I'm referring to the YouTube apps. There's no way to block those video ad's....not on a non-rooted device at least.
considering that every mobile browser now supports HTML5 there really is no need for a youtube app.
 

Teko03

Posts: 621   +329
considering that every mobile browser now supports HTML5 there really is no need for a youtube app.

Apps are optimized and run smoother, YouTube included --- if mobile HTML5 sites were fine and dandy, no would complain about the lack of apps for Windows Phone.
 

robb213

Posts: 349   +114
considering that every mobile browser now supports HTML5 there really is no need for a youtube app.

Apps are optimized and run smoother, YouTube included --- if mobile HTML5 sites were fine and dandy, no would complain about the lack of apps for Windows Phone.
Admittedly, the application isn't clunky like the mobile site and is smooth. But playback is perfectly fine on the site, which personally is all that matters to me. Even on my old RAZR through a wireless-g connection (a poor one too) it streamed fine in HD. It's even better on my One M8 with 5GHz/-n and - AC support now.

And the main reason why there's a lack of applications available for Windows Phone is due to the near non-existant user base. Even if HTML5 was damned by literally everyone, but Windows Phone had a demographic the size of Android, there'd be too many applications to keep track of. Just like how people managed to deal with Ruby, Flash, C, COBOL, and .NET after all these years.
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,605   +3,525
considering that every mobile browser now supports HTML5 there really is no need for a youtube app.

Apps are optimized and run smoother, YouTube included --- if mobile HTML5 sites were fine and dandy, no would complain about the lack of apps for Windows Phone.

apps aren't always smoother than an application designed to handle HTML 5. I have the lumia 1520 and I have no problems running youtube from IE. I have adblock in IE and have no ads on my windows phone. The same is true on iOS and Android. Thinking at all apps are stream lined for their purpose is a huge show of ignorance. The instruction set for HTML5 are built into all smart phones. It's not my fault if you don't know how to use the software you paid for. Either Way, windows phone only accounts for <5% of the market share. If that is your only source then you have plenty of research to do.

Saying that APPS are optimized shows your ignorance of programming as a whole.
 

Teko03

Posts: 621   +329
I kno
apps aren't always smoother than an application designed to handle HTML 5. I have the lumia 1520 and I have no problems running youtube from IE. I have adblock in IE and have no ads on my windows phone. The same is true on iOS and Android. Thinking at all apps are stream lined for their purpose is a huge show of ignorance. The instruction set for HTML5 are built into all smart phones. It's not my fault if you don't know how to use the software you paid for. Either Way, windows phone only accounts for <5% of the market share. If that is your only source then you have plenty of research to do.

Saying that APPS are optimized shows your ignorance of programming as a whole.


You must be at the point of trolling. I have an HTC One M7 and the YouTube app is far smoother & faster than the mobile website. You can't be serious. I know that all apps aren't better than the mobile sites (Capital One's app comes to mind here), but apps are faster the majority of the time.
 

Teko03

Posts: 621   +329
Admittedly, the application isn't clunky like the mobile site and is smooth. But playback is perfectly fine on the site, which personally is all that matters to me. Even on my old RAZR through a wireless-g connection (a poor one too) it streamed fine in HD. It's even better on my One M8 with 5GHz/-n and - AC support now.

And the main reason why there's a lack of applications available for Windows Phone is due to the near non-existant user base. Even if HTML5 was damned by literally everyone, but Windows Phone had a demographic the size of Android, there'd be too many applications to keep track of. Just like how people managed to deal with Ruby, Flash, C, COBOL, and .NET after all these years.


I'm completely aware of the reason for the lack of apps on WP --- I'm a supporter of the MS Ecosystem (own a Surface RT, had a Lumia 710 and looking to get the next flagship Lumia device). I was just using them as an example since users tend to stray away due to the lack of apps. Mobile sites do not suffice all the time. There's a reason people tend to prefer apps, rather its added functionality, performance or for a better experience.
 

MonsterZero

Posts: 585   +336
Comcast will simply but a redirect off all there Broadband customers on youtube.com to there new website. :)

and if you do find a way round that don't worry they will slow it to a snails pace too because **** net neutrality :)

That would suck so bad, ****ing comcast, what a bunch of money grubbing pricks. No one is going to watch this service. Watch them throttle bandwidth to youtube and force everyone to their site.
 
G

Guest

This is hilarious!

Comcast was like "Well if Google is going to start offering highspeed internet access to people then we're going to start offering a streaming video service.... OOOOOOOOooooooo that'll get 'em good. Yeah... that'll get all over Google's biz. We'll get 'em right where it hurts!"

I'm sure the rest plays out like a Warner Brothers cartoon.