• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 year ago

      If he didn’t sold it to Google I don’t think he have enough budget to maintain the site

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        Yeah, they had the better technology (Google Video was very bad) and Google had the money.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          What was bad about Google Video? That was my favourite of the two: nice UI, clean, good recommendations

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            The thing that stuck with me was that I always had the impression that the Video quality was much worse than on Youtube. IIRC when there was content that was available on both platforms, Youtube had the much better picture and sound. But maybe that was just specific to the content I watched back then. There was not THAT much to see in the beginning, not like today where you can spend 24h straight and always see new stuff :-)

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Could be, on my connection back then the quality difference was probably unnoticeable. I remember having to wait for buffering every time I played a video on a website.